Okay, so I'm watching the live CNN feed about Christopher Dorner. Right now he is supposedly holed up in a cabin which is burning to the ground.
And because this dude was evidently pretty heavily armed, it got me thinking about the whole gun-control debate.
And on the CNN feed, they were talking about the tactical weapons that the San Bernardino and LA police would be able to deploy. Things like infrared stuff and high-tech surveillance and all kinds of James Bond-like stuff, and I'm thinking, well yeah, but why couldn't Dorner have access to that stuff too?
Because it's fantastically expensive.
Today my boss and I were separately surfing the web in work areas adjacent to each other, when all of a sudden I could hear "Chiquitita" by ABBA blaring from his computer. And the song went on, and on, and on, until I started laughing and said, "Boss, I didn't know you were an ABBA fan!" And he said, "I'm watching the new Bugatti ad, and that's the song they're using." And he went on to say that the new Bugatti has dual engines, and a top speed of 246 mph, and costs a cool 1.6 million.
And I'm thinking, well, that's excellent, if you've got 1.6 mil to blow.
So. My point. I do have one.
I do not know what semi-automatic weapons cost. I really don't have any idea. But why not, say, pass legislation that says that if you want to buy one, fine, but we're gonna slap a tax on it. A tax of, say, thirty grand per weapon.
Wouldn't that get them off the streets? I mean, sure, people would still have access to Saturday Night Specials, if they're so damn intent on protecting their home or robbing people or whatever. But the shit that fires sixty rounds a minute? Yep, you can still get it, the same way you can buy a Bugatti, but it's gonna cost ya. And yeah, you could still steal one, but how many of them would actually be OUT there, available, if they cost thirty grand each? I'm thinking they'd be about as common as Bugattis.
I dunno. I'm just throwing it out there.