[superleeds]

[ QUOTE ]
1)Wait a second. You are advocating stricter rules involving the possession of a firearm, not the use. Yet, in this example, you are doing the very opposite. I might be willing to listen to stricter rules regarding improper usage of a firearm(though I'm not sure how much stricter we can get), but your example does nothing to gain support for stricter rules regarding the possession of guns.

[/ QUOTE ]

I advocate stricter rules on who should be allowed to own a weapon and on how and where that weapon would be allowed to be kept and used. If I have contradicted myself somewhere in this thread I apolagize.

[ QUOTE ]
2)Well...in a mild version, we have that experiment in place: The USA and the UK. Is there any proof that socialized medicine works better than privatized medicine? I would guess not, I don't know for sure...can someone provide evidence

[/ QUOTE ]

But they are not the two societies I described. They are both regulated. The difference is how they are payed for.

[ QUOTE ]
I would certainly argue that most laws that are preventative in nature are frivolous, and typically, disastrous(prohibition, drug laws).

[/ QUOTE ]

OK argue away. Yes some laws are stupid, some have little or no relevance in todays world, but the law is not a static thing, it changes as society changes and the vast majority of laws reflect and protect society.