	Efficiency is another marker of evaluation that must be analyzed in order to see how well a widespread mandatory child access prevention law would go. That is to say, is it cost effective to enact this policy? Not just from a fiscal standpoint, but rather as a cost to legislature and even local law enforcement. Will they spend more of their time cautioning citizens and explaining the benefits of child access prevention laws, would that possibly take away from their ability to be on the streets or serving their public in other ways? A cost-effectiveness analysis is an important test to run to check the feasibility of these actions. In some areas of the United States, child access protection laws would likely do fairly well – California, being the top state for gun control legislature already, would likely have no issue adopting a national standard. On the other hand, less progressive states might have umbrage with this legislation. I could see it becoming problematic in the American south, and places where guns are carried on a daily basis and considered a huge part of the lifestyle and culture of the area. It would be a time-consuming task for local government officials and police forces to enact this, because there would be such a kickback from so many citizens.
	Enforceability is another issue to look at – it would be easy to tell everyone that they must now have any gun that is in their home unloaded, taken apart, and stored in a cabinet. However, if a citizen were to sign paperwork stating that they understand and agree to those terms, there is still nothing stopping them from outright ignoring this request, or lying just to get the license they are seeking. It also is not a guarantee of long-term safety, since all it takes is one child getting their hands on a firearm when their parent forgets to put it away or unload it one time to spell disaster for everyone involved in yet another tragedy.
Some states have already undergone retooling and legislature in order to analyze their juvenile population’s ability to obtain and use firearms, and this research has proven effective in creating child access prevention laws in many areas. While the data does change from state to state – especially from region to region – it is important to not dismiss any data set as irrelevant. While certain factors absolutely vary between areas, especially how many children in each population have been exposed to firearms and the ethnic makeup of those regions, the underlying issue remains prevalent and of great import for all involved.  
In 1999, New Mexico underwent a deeply thorough profiling of their juvenile offender system to try to understand where these children were getting firearms, and what it was they could do about it, if anything. They found that 57.6% of juvenile offenders admitted that they received their firearm from a friend, parent or relative – this is consistent with the national data reported on prior, but what is surprising is that 43.4% of that population confess that the firearm came from a friend, not a parent.  These juveniles were asked how long it would take them to get a gun should they want one, and an overwhelming 70.6% responded that they could have their hands on one within one day. 
