I'm always in favor of the first amendment, but this is one context where outlawing the firearms does make a difference. There is a significant lower penetration of firearms in Europe period since almost every European country bans possession.
That does not mean that someone who really wants a machine gun cannot get one - but that it takes a lot more effort to get one. Effort that many deranged and unstable people are not willing or able to dedicate the effort to see to fruition. Even in the age of anonymous online exchanges gun import rates are puny compared to firearm availability in the US.
I think it is sound psychology to believe if you make it really hard to get something that an irrational actor will be less likely to pursue destructive behavior. The difference between firearms and drugs is that drug users are recurrent customers and can form an underground economy, the sociopath with a machine gun is often a one time shopper. Seems more economics than anything else as to why it is more infeasible to maintain a firearms black market at scale comparable to the drug market, regardless of ethics.
> I'm always in favor of the first amendment, but this is one context where outlawing the firearms does make a difference. There is a significant lower penetration of firearms in Europe period since almost every European country bans possession.
Did you mean second amendment? Or do you mean that the pro-gun lobby does not have a right to free speech? If it didn't have implications beyond gun control, I might even support it. It is really sad that the only people in the pro-gun lobby are industry shills. Anybody who deviates ever so slightly from the official message gets effectively shut down by the lobby as not being one of them.
That does not mean that someone who really wants a machine gun cannot get one - but that it takes a lot more effort to get one. Effort that many deranged and unstable people are not willing or able to dedicate the effort to see to fruition. Even in the age of anonymous online exchanges gun import rates are puny compared to firearm availability in the US.
I think it is sound psychology to believe if you make it really hard to get something that an irrational actor will be less likely to pursue destructive behavior. The difference between firearms and drugs is that drug users are recurrent customers and can form an underground economy, the sociopath with a machine gun is often a one time shopper. Seems more economics than anything else as to why it is more infeasible to maintain a firearms black market at scale comparable to the drug market, regardless of ethics.