This article makes an incredible, and false leap in logic. Quaalude was hard/impossible to make at home. The Government prohibited it, and it has successfully

This article makes an incredible, and false leap in logic. Quaalude was hard/impossible to make at home. The Government prohibited it, and it has successfully been eradicated. Ergo, we can do the same thing with guns!!! FALSE. The only true bit in this article is that yes it is much easier to grow weed than it is to manufacture a gun at home. But even still, manufacturing a gun a home would be a lot easier than making Quaalude. Guns have successfully been 3d printed. As long as there is a demand for something, there will be a market for it (weather legal or illegal). The reason Quaalude went away is because there were other illegal drugs that filled that void (that were cheaper and easier to make). If there weren't, if people were desperate enough for Quaalude and willing to pay enough, then someone would have supplied it. The second major flaw with this "parallel learning" that the author is trying to do here, is that drugs (specifically Quaalude) are a consumable. You use it, then it's gone. While guns are more permanent tool that can be used over and over. So the existing supply will never just be consumed away. Bottom line, gun prohibition will never work. There will always be demand for guns in the USA and getting rid the the vast amount of guns already out there (there more guns than people in the USA) is not remotely feasible.