I would like to comment on the very detailed and thoughtful letter “Lots of questions, few answers” by Bob Zwick.
Mr. Zwick has done a commendable job of documenting the many and varied suggestions and beliefs for curbing the kind of violence that occurred in Newtown. As he correctly points out, this is an extremely complex problem that has defied any pat or one-size-fits-all solution. While I believe there are proposed measures that can be taken to impact this very specific type of mass murder, that isn’t my point in writing this.
What I would suggest is a somewhat different approach that would be highly controversial, but possibly highly effective.
Strictly control ammunition. Limit who can purchase it and how much they can purchase, including magazines. I have read that it is estimated that the existing ammunition in the country would be expended in about three-and-a-half years, so such regulation would likely have little impact in the initial years.
However, in the years beyond that, there would no doubt be an impact in the amount of bullets fired, whatever the purpose.
There are those who no doubt would think this onerous and unthinkable, and the devil would indeed be in the details, but if we are serious about trying to control these crimes, we need to at least consider unconventional approaches. Without ammunition, a gun is just a piece of metal. Further, I doubt many of these cowardly mass murderers would venture out with a revolver and six bullets.
If we are serious about stopping these horrific crimes, then we have to at least think about regulating ammunition, for as Mr. Zwick points out, there are already hundreds of millions of guns out there and virtually no chance or desire to try to control or confiscate them all.