A better, fairer gun control

Unlike some liberals, I firmly support the Second Amendment.  I think we have a right to own firearms, and I see no reason why law abiding citizens should be prohibited from doing so.  However, I also recognize the harm guns can cause, particularly in the wrong hands or the wrong circumstances, and I recognize the need for limited government regulation of their use (just like with all of our other rights).  It's a tough balance to strike.  

With this in mind, I call your attention to this recent article by former New York Governor, Elliot Spitzer. He proposes a plan whereby the government uses economic incentives, rather than restrictive laws, to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, while still ensuing that law abiding people have access to them.  In a nutshell, the government, as the world's largest firearm purchaser, simply adopts a policy to only buy guns from manufactuers who put in place procedures to avoid selling guns to those likely to use them for unlawful purposes.  You can read the full article here:

 http://www.slate.com/id/2217117/

What I like about this idea is that it does not restrict a single law-abiding citizen from acquiring a gun; nor does it force any manufacturer not to sell guns. It merely creates powerful economic incentives for gun manufacturers to distribute their product responsibly.  U.S. taxpayers have to subsidize the sale of guns; our govenrment needs them to do it's job.  But why should we have to also subsidize the sale of guns to criminals.  Companies that wish to make money through sales that harm us should have to pay for it in the form of lost sales to us.  That's just basic fairness.