Public Procurement for Gun Control

The issue of gun control is one that often lacks very clear and dispassionate analysis because it is understandably laden with lots of political assumptions and ideological debate. And so as the tragedies of individuals going berserk and killing a large number of people at ago happen, the heat comes up again without much light. Indeed, I have stated in a number of posts including this one that the standard arguments are rehashed every now and gain.

That Eliot Spitzer is a clear-headed thinker with a good grasp of the ability of government to lead to public good is something that I increasingly appreciate as he writes columns for Slate magazine each week. In this article today, he presents the novel idea that given the constitutional protection for hand gun possession in the US, the federal government should utilize its monopsony power to ensure good conduct from manufacturers and sellers of firearms.

This is an impressive idea for two reasons, one it goes around the assumed constitutional barrier and the difficulty of amendments without attempts at coercion. Secondly, it recognizes the fact that it is essential to give firearms sellers an interest in keeping its largest buyer satisfied by keeping handguns away from criminals. I must state here that this would be useful because it would be in the federal government's right to amend its procurement policy accordingly without the wholesale condemnation of arms owners. It is obvious that this policy would not necessarily wipe out all misuse of firearms but make it really difficult for criminals to acquire guns that they will then use in committing crime.

What is often lacking in this debate are clear alternatives that are constitutionally defensible and this is surely one of them. A five star article.