If the Second Amendment is incompatible with America today, why not change America instead of the Constitution? By Philip Greenspun.

Apparently all options are on the table now. Although I am not a gun owner myself I wonder if it wouldn’t be simpler to reengineer the U.S. instead of changing the Constitution so that the gun nuts could be deprived of what is currently their right. …

Criminality is heritable (example: Swedish national adoption study). Why not offer criminals and children of criminals cash incentives to live in a serene environment where criminal tendencies won’t be triggered (so to speak)? And, if we believe the research eggheads, we wouldn’t want to accept immigrants from any society where violence is common or immigrants whose relatives had been criminals.

Suburban isolation seems to be unhealthy for everyone. In the non-profit ideas page that I wrote for my crazy rich Google friends I proposed that, instead of shipping barrels of cash to Africa (like Melinda Gates is doing with the money that Bill earned!), American billionaires could fund “Latin American-style Towns for the U.S.” Then we could all go down to the town square every evening and chat with friends and, ideally, not shoot any of them.

Having a lot of time on one’s hands seems to lead to mental health problems and mental health problems lead, in some cases, to mass shootings. Why not terminate all of the government programs that enable Americans to be idle and brooding for years or decades? (High school itself could be considered one of these programs! It is not intellectually demanding for anyone of above-average intelligence (i.e., 50 percent of people) and therefore gives students plenty of time to brood and plot.) …

The Deplorables assume that their attackers are rational and ask questions such as “If the population doubles, would you expect the number of mass shootings to go up, down, or remain the same” (Harvard-educated liberal arts majors respond “the same”! Also, “think of the children”).

hat-tip Matthew