Guns versus Sudafed
Virginia's gun laws:
That being said, there didn't seem to be much outcry when Sudafed became a total inconvenience to purchase, and it seems to have reduced "mom and pop" meth cooking labs set up in houses and barns. Okay, some of us gripe about the Sudafed laws but that's about it. I haven't done anything crazy like write a letter to my Congressman about it.
So instead of an absolutist, "we have to do this one thing" approach, we need some common sense. Real sportsmen might gradually come to the conclusion that some inconvenience might be worth the benefit to society, as long as their rights are respected. I don't have a problem with hunters or target shooters who follow the law, but responsible hunters and target shooters are not the problem.
We have to keep mentally ill people from getting guns, or at least try. You can't regulate whether someone has mental health issues. What are you going to do, send the cops after everyone who is anti-social?
The conservative "answer" emanating from many quarters of the right blogosphere, that everyone should pack heat, is infantile and not viable. People already shoot each other over absurdly petty matters. Turning America into a giant Dodge City is not going to happen.
I don't think anything meaningful will get done on any aspect. Security? Even if we had the resources to put armed guards everywhere, would we want to live that way? Mental health? That's been a problem for decades now. Gun laws? Perhaps, but they might not work as well as intended, and then there is the politics of it all.
Still, we spend billions of dollars on a drug war to no effect in this country, so we can at least try to have an honest discussion. If drug use is bad, gun violence is bad, and if allergy patients have to be inconvenienced, it doesn't seem that extreme to broach the subject of some small inconveniences for responsible gun owners. The NRA types will scream "gun control," but we really need to re-frame this issue as basic, responsible regulation. About like allergy pills are subjected to.
Among the state's rules for gun purchase and ownership:Virginia's Sudafed law:
* There is a one-handgun-per-month limit on sales, but no state license or permit is required to buy a handgun.
* There are no state limits on assault weapons and magazines. An AK47 is as easy to buy as a hunting rifle.
* No background check is required for gun purchases at gun shows, swap meets, or through newspaper or Internet ads. A check is required at federally licensed gun stores.
* There's no state requirement that gun owners register their firearms, making it harder for police to track gun traffickers and guns used in crimes.
* State law forbids city or county governments from enacting their own tougher gun laws.
A. The sale of any product containing ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or any of their salts, isomers, or salts of isomers, alone or in a mixture, shall be restricted when provided or sold by a retail distributor or pharmacy as follows:Look, there are no easy answers. Meth production has shifted, by some acounts, more to Mexico and other countries, and any time you regulate something people want, be it liquor, drugs or weapons, there is bound to be a black market.
1. Retail sales shall be limited to no more than 3.6 grams total of either ephedrine or pseudoephedrine daily per individual customer.
2. Retail personnel shall be instructed in special procedures to be used in the sale of drug products containing ephedrine or pseudoephedrine.
3. Effective September 30, 2006, when any substance containing ephedrine or pseudoephedrine is provided or sold:
a. The product shall only be displayed for sale behind a store counter that is not accessible to consumers, or in a locked case that requires assistance by a store employee for customer access;
b. Any person purchasing, receiving, or otherwise acquiring any such substance shall, prior to taking possession, present photo identification issued by a government or an educational institution;
c. The seller shall maintain a written or electronic log with the purchaser's name and address, product name, quantity sold, and the date and time of the transaction;
d. The purchaser shall enter into the log his name and address, the time and date of the sale, and sign the record;
e. The purchaser shall sign the record acknowledging an understanding of the applicable sales limit and that entering false statements or misrepresentations in the log may subject the purchaser to criminal penalties under ยง 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code; and
f. The sale of a single package to an individual shall not require entry in the log provided it is an isolated sale and the package contains not more than 60 milligrams of pseudoephedrine.
That being said, there didn't seem to be much outcry when Sudafed became a total inconvenience to purchase, and it seems to have reduced "mom and pop" meth cooking labs set up in houses and barns. Okay, some of us gripe about the Sudafed laws but that's about it. I haven't done anything crazy like write a letter to my Congressman about it.
So instead of an absolutist, "we have to do this one thing" approach, we need some common sense. Real sportsmen might gradually come to the conclusion that some inconvenience might be worth the benefit to society, as long as their rights are respected. I don't have a problem with hunters or target shooters who follow the law, but responsible hunters and target shooters are not the problem.
We have to keep mentally ill people from getting guns, or at least try. You can't regulate whether someone has mental health issues. What are you going to do, send the cops after everyone who is anti-social?
The conservative "answer" emanating from many quarters of the right blogosphere, that everyone should pack heat, is infantile and not viable. People already shoot each other over absurdly petty matters. Turning America into a giant Dodge City is not going to happen.
I don't think anything meaningful will get done on any aspect. Security? Even if we had the resources to put armed guards everywhere, would we want to live that way? Mental health? That's been a problem for decades now. Gun laws? Perhaps, but they might not work as well as intended, and then there is the politics of it all.
Still, we spend billions of dollars on a drug war to no effect in this country, so we can at least try to have an honest discussion. If drug use is bad, gun violence is bad, and if allergy patients have to be inconvenienced, it doesn't seem that extreme to broach the subject of some small inconveniences for responsible gun owners. The NRA types will scream "gun control," but we really need to re-frame this issue as basic, responsible regulation. About like allergy pills are subjected to.
