The City of Brotherly Love has been anything but in 2007.

As of July 14^th, the city’s homicide count stood at 220, with most of the murders committed using handguns. True to form, the Democratic city council is pursuing quixotic measures that they think will address the problem: a law that limits handgun purchases to one a month, and another mandating the report of stolen or missing firearms.

These are not new ideas. Across the Delaware River, New Jersey’s legislature already passed a similar gun-a-month scheme. In support of the original bill, Assemblywoman Joan M. Quigley, a Democrat and sponsor of the legislation, said, "I personally can see no reason why anyone would want to go out and buy guns in multiples."

Clearly, then, Ms. Quigley had not given much thought to the possibilities. For starters, the law would prevent a collector from purchasing a pair of antique dueling pistols from a fellow enthusiast. New Jersey residents can sleep safely knowing that somewhere out there, a hobbyist trying to “stockpile” old flintlocks has been thwarted.

And we should collectively groan every time an elected official starts his or her rationale with “I can see no reason why.” It oozes arrogance to presume that one’s limited personal experience is, in itself, justification for such restricting the rights of others.

Personally, I can’t see any reason why someone would “need” to don a monkey costume, carry a golden calf, and, in between chants of adoration, bash an inflatable globe with a plastic club. To the rabble rousers who descend on Davos, Switzerland ever year, however, that’s somehow a lucid message to protest the World Economic Forum.

It’s not a vehicle of expression I would have considered, but hey - whatever carries their calf.

Globe-thumping anarchists dressed as chanting monkeys, of course, don’t kill people. Neither, however, do the overwhelming majority of people who own firearms. When a protester assaults a police officer or sets a car on fire, he sheds the protective mantle of free speech rights and is subject to arrest. Similarly, a person who commits a felony with a gun cashes in his Second Amendment chip.

But in neither case should the transgressions of a minority lead to a general forfeiture of rights by the majority, incrementally or otherwise.

The second proposal in Philadelphia would make it a crime to fail to report the loss or theft of a firearm within 24 hours of when you "discover or should have discovered" the missing firearms. Perhaps all well and good until you get to the “should have” part. “Should have” is a judgment call and will inevitably make criminals out of people who have no idea they did something wrong. Suppose a gun is stolen while the homeowner is on vacation. If that gun is used to commit a crime two days after the homeowner returns, he could be charged. After all, a prosecutor might decide that he “should have” checked the minute he got home.

For an implement that may only see use a few times a year during a trip to the firing range, such rigorous – and yet loosely defined – monitoring is excessive. From a practical standpoint, it’s like saying you are obligated to do an inventory of your sweaters every day. Even in July.

In 1982, Kennesaw, Georgia passed an ordinance mandating that the head of every household keep a firearm and ammunition. (The law was later amended to exempt convicted felons and conscientious objectors.) The result? Home burglary rates dropped by 89%. In the United Kingdom, where gun ownership is severely restricted, the “hot” burglary rate – those committed while the owner is home – is nearly four times that of the United States.

All of which only makes sense: a burglar will not think twice if he knows that the most dangerous thing on the other side of the door is likely to be a frying pan or harsh language. The possibility of something more deadly will give pause to even the most hardened criminal.

Of course, small town solutions are not the cure for big city problems – Philly is not Kennesaw. But while gun crimes make splashy headlines, firearms can clearly play a more subtle and indirect role in crime statistics. Estimates are that guns are used to prevent a violent crime anywhere from 500,000 to 2 million times per year, with the vast majority of those cases merely requiring the brandishing of the firearm.

Put another way, a crime not committed is a crime not reported.

But in places like Philadelphia, this aspect of the debate is overlooked, if not dismissed. Against of backdrop of broken families and drug-ravaged neighborhoods, they have too many young men who view the slightest provocation or insult as an excuse for violence.

And how a gun-a-month scheme could possibly begin to address those problems remains to be seen.