Friday, 4 January 2013

That Gun, Hammer, Registration Business

Some folks sat down and looked at murder statistics in America.  There's an odd thing....typically (on average)....there's more hammer and blunt object killings than killings by a rifle.  It goes up and down....but on average, you have a higher chance of dying from a hammer attack than a rifle shooting.

This of course, brings you to hammer control (or what should be hammer control). Obviously, the news folks don't report hammer attacks because it's not practical or classy.

How would hammer control occur?  You'd have to make up a fancy 300-page law which dictated that you register yourself.  The county agricultural agent would be the right choice for the registration point, but it'd likely turn into a TSA-like operation and six fed guys down at some county office handling hammer registrations.

You'd walk in and declare yourself.....showing an ID, unlike when you vote.  Then you'd admit you'd like to be a hammer user.  The fed guy would ask....regular or ball peen?  You'd likely answer with both.  You'd fill out the form, and he'd ask if you were trained on these, and you'd respond that the shop teacher in school taught you.

Then as you went over to the hammer'd find that all hammers are labeled with a serial number....on both the wood and the steel.  The serials have to match up.  You'd sign some paperwork as Kurt, the counter-guy, put the numbers into a fed database and observed your registration card.

Some fed guy in Tulsa who monitors the hammer database would come to observe that you have forty hammers and likely send out a task force squad to check out your collection or if you'd been selling to non-registered folks.  

Eventually, after enough hammer'd be determined that the typical three-pound hammer was a danger....and they'd require all hammers to be made to a reasonable 1.5 pound size (mini).  Folks would complain, but it's the law, you know.

After I read these numbers....I could not help but be amused.  Once this gets out into the public one is going to take any journalist serious when they talk gun control.

But lets take a minute to make gun control legislation kind of interesting.

For example....if you want gun control....any Senator or Representative found with stock in a company that benefits from gun control...should be taxed at the ninety-percent rate.  This would include their spouse, children or close relatives.

For example.....once you make up the national database, there ought to be a federal judge who has sole responsibility of releasing data pertaining to it.  That would be his sole job for a two-year period.  No one....not even the President or the Senate...would be able to request data from this database....strictly law enforcement officials.

For example....any public announcement of an individual listed on the federal database, would result in a $2-million pay-out to the individual.  Toss out forty names by accident?  Cough up $80 million to the individuals involved.

For some reason, I don't see gun control doing much of anything.  If you made registration a requirement....out of the entire state of Alabama....I'd take a humble guess that no more than five to eight thousand folks state-wide would actually register.  When you consider that 95 adult males of 100 in Alabama hold a weapon....the database would be taken as a joke.

At some point a year or two after registration started.....some Bama Senator would ask the FBI if there was truly on 5k gun owners in Bama?  And the FBI guy would grin and admit it ought to be closer to 700k owners.

Which state would have the highest percentage of owners?  That would trigger some Vegas-like bets.  My bet would be on Wisconsin or Minnesota.  The least registration?  Probably Georgia or Tennessee.

Yep, 2013 will be an interesting year.....for nothing much to happen.

No comments: