In response to:
Dan AZ said...
No, I'm serious.
You can't compare the risk of guns @ home with hand tools & lawn mowers. It's not the same thing.
Let's see with such a tax who would really want to own guns :)
___________________
So disarm, via your tax, those who most need the weapons for self & property protection.
You progressives are just lower than a rattler's belly.
Over the weekend, the Los Angeles Police Department held a gun buy back and paid people $100-$200 in gift cards as an incentive to participate. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa called the buy back a way to fight crime although criminals do not participate in buy back programs. From Reuters:
Police officers handed out $200 grocery store gift cards to people who turned in an automatic weapon, and $100 gift cards to those who provided a handgun, rifle or shotgun.
Los Angeles has held an annual gun buyback since 2009, and similar events have been organized...
Anyway the idea of CCW for all teachers is downright idiotic.
That's how you justified it, Dan. Which is correct, since you have to justify it SOMEHOW. Because it MIGHT cause an accident doesn't cut it, which is presumably why you picked " It's because guns @ home = risk of 'accidents'." instead.
I have no real issue with disposing of old dangerous (i.e. poorly maintained) ones those owned by casual users who doesn't really know how to use or maintain one but to think you are really solving anything is just silly.
btw- the cops involved know better too but all these programs are thought up by libs-who don't.