MANY OPPONENTS OF GUN CONTROL STATE THAT WE HAVE NOT A GUN PROBLEM BUT A CRIME PROBLEM, THAT FIREARMS WOULD NOT CONTRIBUTE TO OUR CRIME PROBLEM IF WE HAD NO CRIME. HOWEVER, IT MUST BE POINTED OUT THAT A SERIOUS ASSAULT WITH A GUN IS FIVE TIMES AS LIKELY TO CAUSE DEATH AS A SIMILAR ATTACK WITH A KNIFE, THE NEXT MOST DANGEROUS WEAPON. HANDGUNS ARE A PARTICULAR PROBLEM, AS THEY ARE SMALL AND EASILY CONCEALABLE; THEY ACCOUNT FOR MORE THAN 80 PERCENT OF GUN KILLINGS AND NEARLY ALL GUN ROBBERIES IN LARGE CITIES. THE PRIMARY REASON GIVEN FOR OWNING A HANDGUN IS SELF-DEFENSE, ALTHOUGH STATISTICS HAVE SHOWN THAT A GUN IN THE HOME IS MORE LIKELY TO KILL A FAMILY MEMBER THAN AN INTRUDER, AND IS LIKELY TO BE INEFFECTIVE IN DEFENDING THE HOME. A REVIEW OF THE PRIMARY GUN CONTROL LAW PROPOSALS REVEALS A NUMBER OF BASIC PROBLEMS WHICH MUST BE CONSIDERED. MANY ANTIGUN CONTROL GROUPS DO SUPPORT LAWS WHICH WOULD CREATE MANDATORY, STIFFER PENALTIES FOR CRIMES USING GUNS, IN THE HOPE OF DISCOURAGING CRIMINALS FROM USING THEM. HOWEVER, IT IS NOT DESIRABLE TO MAKE THE PENALTY FOR GUN ROBBERY SO HIGH THAT THE EXTRA PUNISHMENT RISKED IF THE ROBBER KILLS HIS VICTIM SEEM RELATIVELY SMALL. ANOTHER APPROACH WHICH HAS BEEN PROPOSED IS TO FORBID CERTAIN HIGH-RISK GROUPS, SUCH AS THOSE WITH SERIOUS CRIMINAL RECORDS, THE VERY YOUNG, AND DRUG ADDICTS, FROM OWNING GUNS. MOST STATES HAVE SOME FORM OF HIGH-RISK OWNERSHIP PROHIBITION, HOWEVER, MANY DO NOT REQUIRE PROOF OF ELIGIBILITY. EVEN IF THE LAWS WERE ENFORCED, THEY WOULD BE INEFFECTIVE, SINCE MOST GUN HOMICIDES ARE COMMITTED BY THOSE WHO WOULD STILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR GUN OWNERSHIP. A SYSTEM OF LICENSING GUN OWNERS WOULD BE AN IMPROVEMENT OVER A SIMPLE BAN ON OWNERSHIP, AS IT WOULD REQUIRE PROOF OF ELIGIBILITY. HOWEVER, IT IS AT THIS STAGE THAT GUN ENTHUSIASTS DRAW THE LINE AND START OPPOSING CONTROLS, BECAUSE LICENSING IMPOSES COSTS ON ALL GUN OWNERS. HOWEVER, EVEN IF IT COULD BE IMPLEMENTED, LICENSING STILL WOULD NOT PREVENT MOST MURDERS. GUN REGISTRATION, A SYSTEM STRONGLY OPPOSED BY GUN OWNERS, WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE OWNER PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT THE GUNS HE OWNS, THUS MAKING EACH LEGITIMATE GUN OWNER RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS FIREARMS. THE SYSTEM WOULD SIMPLY BE A SUPPORT FOR ANY OTHER SYSTEM THAT PROHIBITS CERTAIN PEOPLE FROM OWNING GUNS. THE MOST EXTREME SOLUTIONS YET PROPOSED HAVE INVOLED THE BANNING OF HANDGUNS EXCEPT FOR THOSE WHO CAN PROVE THEY NEED THEM (SUCH AS THE POLICE). THIS MOVE IS BITTERLY OPPOSED BY GUN OWNERS. ONE MAJOR PROBLEM WITH SUCH A BAN IS THAT THERE REMAINS A QUESTION OF WHETHER THE RESTRICTION CAN ACTUALLY REDUCE THE NUMBER OF HANDGUNS IN CIRCULATION ENOUGH TO BRING ABOUT A SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN GUN VIOLENCE. THE AUTHOR CONCLUDES THAT ANY GUN CONTROL LAW WILL BE AN EXPERIMENT, AS WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT EFFECT IT WILL HAVE ON THE GUN CRIME PROBLEM. HOWEVER, THE HOMICIDE RATE IS SO HIGH THAT IT IS A NECESSARY EXPERIMENT. (VDA)