That's part of the point, Richard, but easy access to the guns is the other part. I think that statistics still show that people are at more risk of guns owned by family members than by criminals (except, of course, in gang ridden neighborhoods where the wars between mini-nations are as likely, or more so, to take the innocent as the warriors of the other side--sounds like what's going on in Yugoslavia [how many of you still think we are there for humanitarian reasons?}). My next door neighbor was burglarized--in addition to the TV, nine guns were taken. And Tucker--I agree with you that Clinton is an awful president, possibly the worst human being who has held that office (I opposed his impeachment strictly on constitutuonal grounds). But we have been damned with a string of presidents who think that the US has the right to do whatever it damned well pleases all over the world so long as it doesn't affect profits, and the congress goes along with it (the president asks for a six billion dollar raid on the social security "surplus" to buy more bombs to drop on Yugoslavia, congress doubles that amount and tacks on a bunch of pork barrel raids on the same source of funding, and on environmental protections; because the war funding measure is considered urgent, these awful other add ons may pass (how about a constitutional amendment prescribing that each bill that passes congress must be limited to a single subject, a single program? Or at least that all amendments to a bill must receive a majority vote of each house before they can be added. We'll see that one passed up as soon as we get real campaign finance reform). Gawd, I'm wandering off in all kinds of directions.

Back to guns for one thought: the "use a gun, go to prison" laws have one major effect--women who go to jail for killing their husbands serve far more time than husbands who kill their wives. --seed