I never thought I would agree with the VPC (Violence Policy Center) on much of anything other than the color of grass or that the sun was out on a cloudless day.
If you’re not familiar with the VPC they’re about as anti-gun as you can get. For instance, they oppose “smart gun” technology (a gun that can only be fired by its owner through biometrics or similar unproven gadget). They oppose it because they believe more people would buy a gun if it were “safer.”
I stumbled on an argument that they made against Firearm Licensing and Registration. It’s a fact sheet that gives pros and cons of such schemes. Given VPC’s sponsorship you’d expect that the pros would far outweigh the cons. Surprise!
VPC’s pros include better tracing, knowing the types of guns a criminal (or a citizen having a bad day—my paraphrase) possesses, discouraging casual buyers etc.
Their cons are a good argument against licensing and registration: they’re expensive and they use Canada as an example, have little impact on must gun violence (there are a few assumptions here that I might argue with, but won’t right now—i.e., “most gun murders are between people who know each other” like drug dealer vs. drug dealer maybe), and political opposition.
They point out that automobile licensing and registration didn’t save lives. Instead improvements in roads and cars saved lives. This is where they most reveal their true colors. They want regulations on guns and their makers.
You knew there had to be a twist somewhere.