Ditkaless Wonders, I appreciate your arguments. In fact, you have had a huge effect on me. There was a time when I was in favor of all sorts of gun control measures. A few years back you wrote some very good posts which caused me to reconsider several of my positions. That put me on the road to learning more about this issue. As a result, I changed my mind on most of my positions. The strongest arguments I have ever heard against gun control is essentially that these laws just don't work. I buy into that. Just about the only gun control position I have left is believing that the private sales loophole should be removed. That's why it amuses me when some people around here regard me as a poster boy for gun control. Truly I'm not.
That being said, I don't accept your arguments on this one. I already stated why I found the law enforcement arguments (those that are in favor) compelling. I'm not going to repeat them. I simply disagree with you. As I wrote before, if the private sales loophole is removed and crime doesn't go down, then I'll concede that I was wrong about this. But we won't know until we try.
However, I do want to comment on your statement that:
You are perhaps trimming our constitutional freedoms
Maybe you're right about it being uneffective; I acknowledge that possibility. But trimming constitutional freedoms? That's bull####. That's the NRA paranoid line in the sand, and I think you know that, which is why you carefully inserted the word "perhaps."
You are free, obviously, to think and believe as you will. You will find I am not the sort to denigrate or bludgeon those who disagree with me. In fact being in the cohort that disagrees with me generally puts one in fine company.As for perhaps trimming our constitutional freedoms I note that for the private sale loophole to be closed that universal gun registration would have to be implemented. Then the government would insist on making a gun owner the agent of the state for the short time it took to update those records on each subsequent sale. Additionally the government would encumber that process with a fee. Clearly then there is some imposition of the right to own an object. You do not own it free and clear but with encumbrances the government has placed upon that object. You have lost some of the beneficial rights of ownership we associate with most items. That could be considered a taking. I recognize this and suggest one might consider addressing the situation. I do not advocate the position, I recognize it. That is hardly the same thing as being bull#### or implying I might be a shill for the NRA's position. It is merely beginning to address the next steps as one pursues your avenue.
Me, I have always believed that the most common gun control ideas espoused cannot be accomplished under our constitution without doing severe violence to its meaning, unless the second amendment is itself amended. I have clearly stated many times that the second amendment, correctly understood, is anachronistic and needs to be changed. I would support a revision to the second amendment done through the people and the legislature. I think there would be great utility in forcing ourselves to form consensus. It would promote a maturity sorely lacking in our country for generations. The wisdom of our founders is deeper than many imagine. their gift to us was not only freedom, but forcing us to respect each other at least enough to get essential works done.
In the end I am not opposed to sensible gun control, I would actually support any number of measures involving registration including not just serial number registration but also with ballistic test result registration for each gun. I would support secure storage laws with both criminal and civil presumptions for failures. I would support mandatory insurance requirements.
What I cannot support is disregarding or tortuously and purposefully ignoring the constitutional process in well meaning but poorly considered attempt to address a statistically insignificant, if horrifying, phenomena.
I do understand that my position has been coopted by the insincere, by those who would actually not want any change, by those hiding behind the constitution, unwilling to own their positions or who truly are, as you intimate, paranoid. I appreciate it is not possible to sort the wheat from that chafe simply through reading writings on a public board. It is not unreasonable for you to have your suspicions.