If they get a majority, horror of horrors, it would mean an awful less debate about the topic, not that there’s been too much of that that’s been terribly rational. No differentiation between Long guns and restricted firearms registry, parading of victims of gun crime who the Registry failed to protect, lies about statistics, “support” statements from hand-picked groups, and so on.

Just read something on the CGC’s websites mentioning that funding for screening got cut. There’s a real easy place to redirect the $4million, 10 Million, 100Million Dollars ( whatever the actual number is) that the registry costs to actually have some meaningful impact in keeping guns from the people who ought not to have them, as opposed to an inert data file of people who do.

I like Jack’s approach of wanting to find workable alternatives, while I don’t trust him, given his history with the issue, I think it’s definitely the way to go.