So...more random shooting

I don't think anybody has to "market" guns to five-year-olds. There is plenty of demand.A few years ago there was a segment on one of those American "news" shows, 60-40 or 20 Minutes or whatever, about a woman who goes around to daycare centers teaching gun awareness. She would tell the children, "If you see a gun, don't touch it. Go and tell an adult." They dutifully repeated the instructions.Then they were turned loose in a playroom with a real (non-functioning) gun. All of them, including the woman's own child, happily chose the gun out of the toybox, played with it, pointed it at each other and pulled the trigger. They knew how to load it; they knew how to fire it; they knew it was real.A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. A little armament makes it even more dangerous.

They're marketing guns to the parents of five-year-olds. The children want them but the parents aren't obligated to buy them.If the parents were responsible gun owners, chances are the children would be too.

I think the problem is in fusing the Constitution and the Bill of Rights together. As far as I'm concerned, the Constitution should define how the government is constituted, not restrict what the government can do. The Bill of Rights should be tweaked as necessary by the constituted government.

You need to catch up on your history. In 1935 all "dependencies" on the British Parliament were removed by mutual agreement. We didn't run away from home and we weren't kicked out. Both child and parent were mature about it. Yes, that's the problem. You did it the wrong way because you weren't ready.

In retrospect it may seem short-sighted but the American colonies were a minor sideshow compared to the perpetual war with France. You might compare the situation with Britain withdrawing from the Channel Islands in WW2.Of course, you ran out of whoop ass in 1812 when a handful of Canadians sent you packing.