[jyl]

This is a hypothetical question.

Assume that there was an inexpensive, foolproof, easy-to-use, personal device that would immediately, and without causing injury or destruction, stop any physical attack or assault. Let's call it a Stopper. A gang of armed men attacks an old lady, she merely reaches into her purse, triggers her Stopper, and the attackers are all unconscious. The black helicopters come for you, your Stopper puts the federales to sleep. Zombies surround your house, pull the Stopper out and they are all down. A Russian armored division invades Boise, the good folks of Utah trigger their personal Stoppers and all the Commies go limp.

You get the idea. Kind of like a phaser on wide stun.

Everyone can have as many Stoppers as they like, stash them away, they cost $20, there are hundreds of millions available, they never run out of juice, they don't need any government permission to function, they never actually HURT anyone.

Got that?

Now, here is the catch. To get the Stoppers, America has to give up all its firearms. Okay, the military keeps theirs so they can fight wars (though even a platoon of Rangers with Barrett .50s is easily defeated by a little old American grandma with a Stopper). And hunters keep their bolt actions and their over-unders to take deer and ducks.

But all the other firearms - gone. No American not hunting partridge or Pakistanis can have a firearm. Of any kind.

You get to make the call. Do we get the Stoppers, or the firearms?