What mechanisms exist to prevent background checks for gun ownership from become too onerous, violating civil liberties?
What mechanisms exist to prevent the exclusionary criteria against gun ownership from becoming too restrictive, preventing ownership to those who should be permitted? Particularly troubling is using "mental illness" as a criterion, potentially to be abused by classifying opposing political positions as mentally ill.
If anyone fails the background check, let the final decision be made by a dice roll: there is a small probability that gun ownership will be permitted despite failing the background check. Then, follow the applicant to see whether they actually cause harm with their gun to evaluate the accuracy of the background check. Inaccurate criteria should be dropped.
Gun control measures are often politically motivated and implemented without significant effort to measure whether measures are effective and without a mechanism to repeal those which are not. Actually, far more than gun control: all of politics.
A purely quantitative approach is not without its own flaws, perhaps masking deeper problems with society. Gun violence is a result of the war on drugs which is a result of racism. A quantitative approach will only reveal gun violence to be correlated with some politically correct proxy for race.
No comments :
Post a Comment