h a l f b a k e r y
Expensive, difficult, slightly dangerous, not particularly effective... I'm on a roll.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
or get an account
There is much bruiting about guns in the US.. The licensing process is intended to weed out people with evil tendencies, to make sure that guns are owned only by those with good intent. The specific intent of the owner need not be spelled out on the license, nor is ability to use a gun a prerequisite.
But there is considerable overhead established to make sure that the wrong people do not get licenses.
How is it, then, that intent or proposed use must be spelled out for other items requiring a license? It is unfair and impractical. The overhead for gun licensing certainly should be applicable everywhere. I propose that the license certifying that one may own a gun should allow the ownership of all and any useful objects or substances, and specifically dynamite. Dynamite is invaluable in landscaping and home remodel projects and can also be used to signal neighbors and as an aid to pyrotechnic displays.
One could make the case that said license should also clear the bearer to own polar bears and other exotic animals, but the practical use of these animals is questionable.
||Make successful suicide a prerequisite and I'll back your
new firearms licensing idea to the hilt.
||We've halfbaked this before. It didn't go over well.