SpokenTruth said:
But you don't see anybody in Congress using that as reason to not bother with obligating insurance and licenses. With guns, Congress and the NRA claim that people will not follow the law so why bother. |
To me it makes sense to have someone take a gun test like they do a driving test. I had gun safety when I was younger. Believe my license still says something on the back to that effect as well. Looked and it indeed says firearm certificate. (FYI, I own zero guns) Makes sense to have some sort of training before you are given somethign that could harm others. A driver test and its insurance is not for you, it is for others on the road.
But just like drivers tests and insurance, I don't beleive for a moment that this test would stop anything. People without licenses would still get themselves a gun, just as people have cars that aren't registered and they have licenses. A gun test doesn't magically guarantee that everyone with a gun has taken it. Hell everyone I know that owns a gun (hunters) has their firearm certificate like me. I'm gonna go on a limb and say most gun owners who commit crime/murder/ect do not have their certificate.
This Vegas guy was millionaire. It doesn' take a millionaire to get a gun from teh black market. Do you really think anything could have stopped him from getting these guns? If there were limits on type or quanity or anything, he woudl just no longer do it the legal way and go illegal.