
       Two questions:  When was this, and do you have the relevant
numbers.  (Please note, this is *not* in any way an indication I don't
believe you or that you're not correct, but when the drop occured is
relevant.)
   

       The primary objection (beyond ones based on the ideal of
RKBA that it is simply not something the government should do) is
that it makes guns a play-thing and tool of the rich and connected.
It discriminates against the poor.

       Is self-defense considered appropriate, and if so, under what
conditions?  (Are you allowed, for instance to get a gun for protection
if you're going to be carrying a very large sum of money on a regular
basis or have been threatened.)


       This has been suggested in the U.S., and generally supported among
gun owners.  What many object to is that many, if not most, proposals
contain a sort of "gotcha" clause which allows an arbitrary denial, even
if you qualify in every way.


       At this point, it should be pointed out that in general
a driver's licence in the U.S. is for the most part nothing like its
European counterpart.  I understand getting one is far more difficult
there than here.  In the U.S. it's a joke. 

       But my usual objection is that you're discussing two different
things.  For instance, in the U.S. a driver's license is a permit
to operate a motor vehicle on a public road.  It is not necessary
to own one, or to operate it on private property.  That is, the
ability to require driving permits is generally considered to arise
from the government's legitimate power to enact reasonable regulations
for behavior on public lands.  A permit to own an automobile, for instance,
which is far closer an analogy, would be a much harder thing to get
past legally, since it wouldn't be based on making regulations on public
property, but in restricting activity on private property.              


        This varies *widely*.  (One thing I think Europeans have
a difficult time with is that the U.S. has fifty unique jurisdictions,
where the laws from one state to another can be as radically different
as from one country in Europe to another).

        Some places allow open carry of both guns and knives.  Some allow
concealed.  Some prohibit both, or allow one or the other.  And it can
be either a state or local restriciton.       


       The question must be asked:  Is the right of *this* individual
affecting the rights of this *other* individual.  What we usually
get is that the rights of this *group* (meaning some individuals within
this group, here defined as "people who own guns,") are adversely affecting 
the rights of some other group.  

       If for instance, "Bob" were using his gun to attack "Steve," you'd
have a point.  But essentially what we're discussing is that becuase
some person who qualifies as a member of the group "people who own
guns" then some third person, perhaps in another *time zone* is told
that their being a member of that group is taking away somebody else's
rights.  It's like trying to punish all newspapers for the libel commited
by one.


       The issue is crime, violence, and murder.  The question is to
what extent guns and gun legislation impact those.


       Of course not.  It would be nice if we didn't have to fear that
other people might get it into their twisted little minds to hurt us.
But currently we don't have that option.  Nor do I expect we will.


       No state does.  In any case, there's a limit to which the state
may enforce it's "wisdom" on me.  Freedom in general is an unwise
concept.  If you pre-emptively restrict everything which might be
"unwise" then freedom becomes a meaningless concept.
   

       I'll raise my hand against driver's licenses.  As currently
implemented they're a waste of time and little more than revanue
generation for the State and ignored by a startling number of
drivers.  It does not guarantee a level of skill any higher than is
necessary to get your car on the road and get yourself or somebody
else killed, or a knowledge of traffic laws beyond what any ten year
old will have picked up riding around in his parents car.

       But, as I mentioned, they're two different things.
