Gyroscopic Investing

Here's a compromise I propose to the gun control people. What if we focus new gun control laws on specific at-risk areas where gun crime is the highest. How about Chicago and Washington DC which currently have the highest per capita gun deaths and violence per year. Maybe just outright ban all handguns and assault weapons in these two cities and watch the gun violence plummet, then use those two cities as an example for why we should impose similar controls throughout the country. Heck, Chicago has had 23 homicides and 80 people shot year-to-date and it's only been two weeks into the new year!

So I propose focusing gun-control efforts on high gun crime areas. Does that seem like reasonable gun control?

I think federalism generally works best in this kind of situation where you have such a dramatic gulf between people's attitudes. I don't think more gun control will work, but if the people who live in those places repeatedly vote for politicians who support it, who am I to tell them no? Heck, I don't appreciate it when they meddle in my political process.

This might be a good compromise: de-incorporate the second amendment--thereby making it no longer apply universally--then pass a new amendment banning any federal gun control. Then the states can just drift in whatever directions they prefer. Some states can have their own right-to-keep-and-bear-arms constitutional provisions and allow permitless carry of concealed suppressed machine pistols, and others can ban all gun ownership outright like they clearly want to.