Letter: Why not insure guns, tie owners to them?

By now we've all heard the pros and cons about gun control, and Illinois chose to legislate this issue by banning access to certain types of firearms, raising the hackles of those who claim the current decision runs afoul of Constitutional rights.

At least two other options have yet to be explored - both involving commerce - and center on strategically regulating access.

• Some argue cars can kill people, so why not ban cars, too? Better yet, let's flip the logic and treat guns the same way we treat cars. How? Mandatory insurance. Once you or lease a gun, you must buy qualified firearm insurance. Premium rates increase with each shooting incident (accidental or intentional) just as with car accidents.

• Some argue for authorities to enforce current laws and registration requirements. Better yet, focus on the product itself. Manufacturers equip guns with safety mechanisms that manually lock the trigger to prevent firing. Why not add a computer chip that creates an initial step before the registered owner manually can unlock the safety? At purchase, the retailer must link that consumer to the gun such that only the registered owner may operate it.

This negates any problems from the firearm being lost/misplaced, stolen or improperly stored/secured. Regulating firearm access through commerce in the form of costly insurance coverage and costly security measures technically leaves the Second Amendment alone, regardless of interpretation.

R. Dana Barlow

Schaumburg