This example prompts Spitzer and Pope to ask: “Why do we buy guns from companies that permit their products to be sold to bad guys?”
Why do we buy cars from companies that permit their products to be sold to alcoholics?
Talk about weak, pathetic reasoning. I don't know if I am more amazed at the idiocy of the underlying idea or that someone who had a law degree, was an Attorney General for NY, and then Governor thinks we are all stupid enough to buy it.
However, the idea is still flawed. The government simply can't subsidize enough manufacturers to make the program effective. The best they can do is make such firearms cost more and thus create a niche market ruled by manufacturers who have zero obligation to the government and likely resent the government for the favoritism they show competitors. Personally, I don't think gun control people are going to be happy with what happens there; but I think it will work OK for me.
ETA: Same subject being discussed in this thread:
Personally, the most effective way I could see to do it would be for the banks that lend money to businesses to impose conditions on the manufacture and distribution of firearms that were a condition of receiving credit. Since Uncle Sam already owns the banks now, that shouldn't be too hard.
Even with that though, there is enough capital out there that is free of such restrictions that it would be a temporary solution at best - and they would end up making groups like the NRA even more powerful if they stepped in to fil the gap in credit.