Congrats on Citizenship!
Option A would be nice but in reality, the urbanization of the US and the change in demographics means it's a losing tactic.
Allserene, this is the logic I've heard for a long time now. It was the logic behind a whole series of compromises with the antis all the way back to the 1960's. But something really remarkable has happened in spite of this conventional wisdom. As we've become more urbanized and hunt less, we are *NOT* giving up the firearms. A quiet revolution in concealed carry rights flipped those laws on their heads, overturning 100 years of status quo in precisely the opposite direction you would have predicted. We haven't been losing ground, we've been winning it at all levels from the CCW permits to the US Supreme Court. Congress hasn't been able to pass any major gun control legislation since Clinton, and wouldn't touch the issue even with Obama in power and D's in charge of the hill.
Today, the only places in the US with serious gun control are a minority of states and cities. And a quick review of those states and cities should be enough to disabuse any notion that they herald some bold new direction in policy. They're tired old east coast mob havens and rust belt corruption pits.
In other words, keep the faith and don't assume that the antis have antis must be compromised with.
Beyond this, remember also that the sort of middle ground you're talking about with additional restrictions on ownership ends up creating havens for criminals, not lowering crime. As you note this is a nation of 50 sovereign states. Clamping down in DC means nothing to a criminal who can buy anywhere else and come back into town. Milwaukee Wisconsin, BTW, has an "in between" system of gun laws precisely as you advocate. CCW is prohibited flat-out, there's a 48 hour waiting period for handguns and while you can carry open you risk police harassment and the weapon must be unloaded. What does that get you? A criminal confident you will not be able to do squat.
Personally I think the best government involvement comes from those governments which embrace the reality and seek to assist gun owners rather than attack us. State gun ranges, state gun safety programs, and state training are all excellent ideas. Not coupled with gun control as a "compromise," but offered in the public spirit to help make us better shots and safer.
it's just something to fantasize about and is fairly harmless
While I agree that the anti-Obama table thumping is the fantasy of a deluded minority, do not underestimate what 200 million + small arms means. Obama has not been an anti-gun president, and the AWB didn't even get revived. If things had been different, the reaction would not have been limited to a few on the hard right. There is nothing "fairly harmless" or "mostly harmless" about the US. It's a dangerous country full of dangerous people. It is not the UK. I know a meek fellow here, who runs a low rent motel. He's a vegetarian 7th Day Adventist who wouldn't hurt a fly. But he put six slugs into a would-be robber a few years back. So don't assume that because people put up with the lawn height requirements of the community counsel that they would tolerate a federal mandate to "hand them in."
