Some valid points jmak, but I am inclined to disagree with you about us living in a safer world. Going by the stories reported on the news and in the paper, I hardly think this is the case. (and these are only the reported ones).
The system is flawed, and the rest of this reposnse will be based on that statement.
I have no problem if a 20 year-old owns and carries a firearm, regardless what he does or who he is, i.e. at a youth league rally, going to church, stuffing his face at McDonnalds. In fact, I have no problem if they bring back the law that you can get a firearm licence at the age of 17. Why must it be 21? Why is a person considered a major when they are 18 and are allowed to make decisions, like voting, driving a car, being employed, etc., but are still considered a minor by the Firearms Control Act, which stipulate they need to be 21 to apply for a firearm competency certificate? That's just another primse example of how contradictory and rediculous the Firearms Control Act really is.
I agree that people shouldn't want a gun just for the sake of having a gun, no argument there. BUT, why not? (just throwing a spanner in the works, but hear me out). How many times have you bought something, whatever, just because you wanted it? At the end of the day, a firearm is simply a piece of property, a tool, a device used to do XYZ. Same as a car, a hammer, or a new pair of shoes. I agree that there needs to be a great level of understanding and responsibility associated with having a firearm, and that holds true for anything that can cause injury or harm to another human being. By that token, the same process should apply for people buying cars, hammers, new butter knives, etc. But in essence, yes, I agree, people should be responsible, and those who aren't should be locked up in a deep dark hole and forgotten. The law is just so messed up that it makes it difficult for people to prove that they can be responsible.
As for the gun laws having a very good basis, they really don't.
