The LA Times called...

[fabsroman]

Great reply Rocky.

"Put simply, gun makers -- whose products kill even when used as directed -- would have to take responsibility for curbing the consequent public health toll."

The guns do not kill when used as directed. If they were never aimed at anybody, they wouldn't kill anybody, and I don't think aiming them at people is part of the "use as directed" part of it. How about vehicles. They kill like crazy when used as directed.

"Under our plan, Congress might require gun makers in the aggregate to reduce gun homicides from 12,000 to, say, 7,000 in 10 years, with appropriate interim targets along the way. Individual firms would each have their own targets to meet, based on the extent their guns are currently used in homicides. Or Congress might simply leave it to neutral experts to determine just how much of a numerical reduction should be required -- and how quickly. Either way, the required decline would be substantial."

How are they going to track how many homicides are committed with a specific brand of gun if they cannot catch all the perpetrators?

As far as I am concerned, that article is pretty stupid, but what do you expect.

If they actually came out with some type of finger/thumb print reader on the gun, I would probably be interested in it, but only if it was extremely reliable. I'm thinking about getting a little bed side safe that uses a thumb print to unlock it, so it is kind of along the same lines.