How should they be viewed? For a start people should stop using euphemisms when talking about them. They're weapons. Firearms is almost as good a word to use, but ultimately the only word that fully applies is weapon.
Second, stop making comparisons to things that simply don't apply. The only thing that possibly ties a motorcycle to a firearm are the words, "I want." By that metric you could just as easily tie a motorcycle to a baby. The logical fallacy is obvious in the second, so why not the first?
Thirdly, require an accredited training course (either hunting or defence) for firearm ownership. Accreditation would be performed by government, but training and testing would be performed by trained civilians. This would satisfy the "well regulated militia" portion of the Second Amendment, helping to instill proper reverence and practise in firearm owners.
Fourth and last, have a NATIONAL firearms strategy. This mishmash of State laws is ridiculous. You're one country. Something this important shouldn't be dealt with on a virtual ad hoc basis.
|