Yeah, but my point remains that I’m still the only one I know of who can be bothered to bring them up, and I’m getting sick and tired of that, in much the same way one gets sick and tired of constantly having to remind children to not to try to fry the cat in pure Nesson oil.

"Well-crafted legislation and voluntary programs to address them seem like a good idea to me. And believe it or not, there actually is such a thing as well-crafted legislation."

Um, dude?  Whatever makes you think I wouldn’t believe it?  I’m not a minarchist, y’know; I just start from the fact that government — the definition of the State via inter-Citizen contracts — is fundamentally based upon the regulation of the initiation and use of force, particularly by proxy.

There’s a place for the State in the world; it’s in my best interests for me to have a say in how the use of force by others is regulated, and in that regulation being enforced.  The tradeoff in accepting some restrictions upon my own use of force is far more than worth it.

I may be mistaken but I think the NRA offers gun safety courses for free.  (They may not be shooting instruction courses, but still…)

And when the thumbreader crashes at the worst possible moment (Come on, no computer has ever done that. /sarcasm) we will have a new definition of "Blue Screen of Death".

The idea of the profs was to put the onus on the manufacturers for the use by others — hence my choice of who offered it (perhaps through contract with local retailers, dealers etc.) But hey, I’m not picky who offers it.

But more importantly — as for these programs being offered in most communities … oh really?  Where?  I live in a relatively gun friendly state in the south.  I have NEVER seen a free program to introduce safe gun use, handling and shooting.  Apparently public high schools in the some areas of the south used to (and some few still do, I think) offer gun safety and handling classes.  More need to add that back in to the curriculum. Maybe Heller  will help that.

If there were a free program in our community I would have taken it.  Do you have any info on these programs and where they are offered?

I ended up taking a concealed carry class at a local range last year which I paid for.  Never handled a weapon before.  Recently took my 18 year old daughter (never handled a gun before) and went shooting with my Army officer son who was in town.  Will go back with daughter as it is important that she be comfortable with hand guns (and probably rifles before we are done) not to mention she can hit what she aims at.  Practical Shooting is a way to stay sharp.  Something you never want to use, like insurance. As an aside — I am a white female over 60.

As a new thought I think I will suggest to the local gun guys that they approach the community colleges continuing education programs … but that will still cost those under 65 (usually free over 65).

If education is supposed to reduce poverty, sexism, racism etc. can gun use education reduce murder and increase safety?

Now there’s a thought.

Such programs are available in most communities.  (They aren’t always sponsored by gun manufacturers but that doesn’t seem essential.)

One of the interesting things about the gun control discussion is that very few "new" proposals are actually new/untried.

The existence of a problem does not imply the existence of a solution, let alone one with "nice" properties.

I ask because if there is more than one manufacturer, odds are that one is "worse" than the other.

If we always shut down the "worst" one….

Sasha: The law in question that you mention could easily be changed. There would be no Constitutional impediment to so doing that I can see. Regulation of manufacture and sale and transfer of firearms strikes me as fully in keeping with both the letter and spirit of the 2nd amendment.

I would utterly agree that the trend toward banning and confiscating weapons is disturbing, and it’s good to see America moving in the direction of liberalization on this issue instead.

In the case of with-gun suicides, the gun is recovered, but murders are different – the weapon often isn’t, even when the murder is "solved".

But, let’s ignore that.

Even if we assume that one can count accurately, I pointed out that the count doesn’t have the desired properties.  I presented a number of problems with the proposal (large number is inappropriate, gun type matters and so does benefit) and the response is a complaint about "attitude".

I’m new here – where do I find what forms of criticism are acceptable?

There are other problems – if a "bad dealer" sells mostly one brand but also sells a couple of others, those others get a pass with any "count" scheme.

I didn’t mention that a huge fraction of "crime guns" go through multiple hands and those chains include dealers outside the original manufacturer’s control.  (Example – a manufacturer sells to a police department who later trades the guns in and they’re resold.  Or, someone buys, trades in, and the gun is resold.  How can the first manufacturer have any control in either case?)

If there’s an actual problem with a dealer, the only reasonable way to deal with it is directly.  This has far fewer problems.

> of your concerns can be addressed by well-crafted legislation

Even if we assume that it’s possible to write good rules along these lines (you have to actually draft said rules, not simply assert that it’s possible), odds are that the actual legislation won’t be good.