[carsongross]

Why not kick the whole problem down to where it constitutionally belongs: the states. The constitution is gob-smackingly clear on the issue: the federal government is not to restrict the right to keep and bear arms. It's also clear (but denied, depending on the issue in question, by both the right and the left) that the states can do whatever they damned well please in order to maintain what their people feel is a well trained (that is, "well regulated") militia, from tight restrictions on gun ownership, to allowing automatic weapons.

I dunno, maybe Texas should be free to be Texas, and New York can go ahead and be New York.

If the states just left each other alone, The Big Sort would take care of 99% of these issues. Of course, there isn't much money in that...

[jmillikin]

State governments are also subject to the bill of rights, and that's a damned good thing.

[stcredzero]

> Why not kick the whole problem down to where it constitutionally belongs: the states

Would this be accompanied by greater control and enforcement on inter-state gun commerce by the Feds? Kicking the problem down to the states is going to be very leaky unless that happens too.

[rdl]

Incorporation doctrine, 14A -- this stuff applies to the states as well.

Some state constitutions are even more clear than the federal constitution on limiting the ability of the government to regulate arms, though.