I see the sophistry, yes, but lets stay on track. We’re talking about firearms here. I’ve already answered the beer and speeding arguments, and have no wish to expand that into the thousands of scenarios you may wish to present.

Why wouldn’t it? 

Exactly. 

That’s what they told Taft. 

Nor to most people I know. 

No, but 10 million people would potentially molest them if it were legal. Your idea isn’t a sound basis to ground laws in. 

Reducing homicide rates isn’t the point? Then we seem to be at cross purposes.

https://www.mvcr.cz/mvcren/file/zakon-o-strelnych-zbranich-a-strelivu-en-doc.aspx

Rethink this. 

The threshold is actually more difficult than that. I suggest you do some reading as to who by, how, when, and why these laws are enforced.

You want to give it another go pal?

The threshold is actually more difficult than that. I suggest you do some reading as to who by, how, when, and why these laws are enforced. 

I gave him a star this time. He put the work in, and the 9/11 payoff actually got me good.  

Somehow it has indeed. 

I saw that was a talking point in my favorite nest of vipers yesterday.

And the Alevi, and Kurds.

The elephant was already in the room, Russia just sold a few tickets to the circus. 

I agree, see the Czech Republic for the correct way to balance heavy alcohol consumption with a low firearms homicide rate. 

It is much more difficult to kill someone without a firearm than with one.