Originally Posted by Buickguy
The problem is that the technology exists. The cork has been pulled and the genie has escaped, so to speak. Since it would be impossible to uninvent the technology, the question becomes one of further restriction. Looking at the history of firearm restriction in the United States is an interesting study.
The earliest restrictions were local. Some western frontier towns had carry restrictions that were selectively enforced. Locals were seldom, if ever stopped but transients were often asked to check their firearms in town. After the civil war, most restrictions were designed to keep firearms out of the hands of minorities. The first federal restriction came with the National Firearms Act of 1934.
NFA '34 placed a tax and essentially licensure on certain firearms and components, including automatic and select fire firearms (machine guns and those switchable to machine gun fire), silencers, short barrel rifles, and short barrel shotguns. Of all restrictions, this one has been the most successful. Since passage of NFA '34, there has only been one case of a licensed gun being used in a crime. The next major federal restriction came with the Gun Control Act of 1968.
GCA '68 established a licensing for firearm dealers, forbid the interstate sale of firearms directly to the consumer, established restricted categories of people (convicted felons, dishonorable discharged, et al), and included restrictions on ammunition. GCA '68 has been amended several times since its inception, including the addition of misdemeanor domestic violence as a category for restriction, the National Instant Criminal background Check System (NICS) and the "Semi-Automatic Assault Weapons" ban, certain provisions of which have sunset. The results of GCA '68 and its amendments have been less than successful, especially when compared with NFA '34.
Firearms were more readily available in the 1950s than in the latter half of the 20th century and the first part of the 21st century. Murder has always been illegal.
There is a point of diminishing returns. When does making more things illegal stop someone determined to break the law.
Actually, I suspect making it illegal and enforcing the law with at least moderate diligence.would make it much less likely that mentally unstable high school and college aged kids would get ahold of it. Tell the parents of dead kids that their deaths are just a reflection of the law of diminishing returns.