Quote Originally Posted by SWedd523 View Post
You know somebody has lost an argument when they make posts like this.

Should've known better than to take the bait. Find somebody else to troll
I'm not the one who brought up gas chambers and systematic extermination. That was you and Chef.

If your stance is going to be that law enforcement can't track where the guns are once they're sold, because if they know where the guns are then they'll be able to know who has them, and if they know who has them they know who to confiscate them from, and if they know who to confiscate them from then they will confiscate them, and once they confiscate them it's all power grabs and genocide, then there's no argument to have. Once you've convinced yourself that such "give-a-mouse-a-cookie" scenarios are inevitable, you'll be against any meaningful way of holding people responsible for the firearms they've purchased, and as such it literally is impossible to slow down the black market (although criminals don't need to go to the black market right now, they can just buy from anyone who isn't a licensed dealer in some states).

If your parameters for legislation aimed at reducing gun violence are that it can't involve any sort of tracking of firearms and that it can't place any further limit on the availability of firearms (I'm talking about who can buy them, not bans of individual types), then you're right: there's no way to police criminals and we all might as well stock up. I just think your parameters are inherently flawed.