
Originally Posted by
ToasterOven
Obviously, it will never happen, but it could be done over 20 or so years. You start by not allowing new sales. Then in 10 years you offer to buy certain types. Finally, you make the penalty huge. There would be some outcry and a lot of bluster, but people would fall in line eventually. It's very human to accept authority.
Regular citizens would fall in line.
Criminals wouldn't.
It would be a disaster.
Doesn't matter how "harsh" the penalties for gun ownership would be. The criminal element will not turn theirs in, and in fact it will be impossible to locate all firearms, as many in the hands of criminals are unregistered or stolen.
Right now there is a huge deterrent in the US for home invasion robberies -- namely that the homeowner might be packing and shoot you if you try.
However, if you know that Joe Homeowner was a good little citizen and turned in his guns, and you still have your guns, you can break in with very little fear.
Personally I would not feel comfortable in a home with no gun, where the criminals KNOW I have no gun.
Non-gun-owners are actually deriving the benefit from gun owners, as criminals looking to break into their home don't know who owns firearms and who doesn't.
And what about businesses? Same thing.
This absolutely would not work in the US. You can theorize all you want about the ways you could do it, the way Europe has done it, the way Australia has done it... and it still won't work.
The US is and always has been a different country than the others.
Sorry if I don't trust that career criminals are going to turn in their guns and play by the rules when asked to do so.
BTW, if you remove guns, that doesn't necessarily stop spree killers. The Boston Marathon killers didn't use guns until they were running from police. Psychos will usually find a way to kill if they are determined to do so. Focusing on the guns themselves is not the right way to go about it. It's basically weakening the innocent.