https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/26/politics/gun-violence-data-what-matters/index.html summation: more guns=more gun deaths. Makes sense to me...
It's getting pretty tiresome and irksome to see you continue to minimize the death of school children.
And I have shown that even after these increases, they still have a 1/4 of the murder killings that we have and a fraction of the mass killings, which shows you that what they did was an optimization as they never had the absurd number of fire-arms per capita that we have. Do not disagree with any of that, but even before their gun control they never had more than 1 firearm per citizen, as the US has. They (and Australian) went from around 0.3 to 0.15, we are at 1.2 - a whole different ballgame. I do not disagree with that. background checks are the easiest way to remove these tools from the unqualified. I think the US's checkered past on racism, slavery and equal rights compared to other first world countries show where the constitutions difficulty of adjusting to the modern world has made the most harm. It does not change the fact that it has very good portions as well and clearly was made in good faith for the population. It has just been protected in a way that is very harmful to updates to changing conditions, unfortunately.
I didn't suggest most people were. But what most people are suggesting will likely require a constitutional amendment to overcome the Supreme Court and resistance from most of the states... What I have suggested does not. So I am suggesting that we make the changes we can realistically make as soon as possible.
Two Professors Found What Creates a Mass Shooter. Will Politicians Pay Attention? 9 minute read. Sounds like these two need to testify at every state house in the country, or straight to the floor of congress tomorrow.
I contend that this difference has much more to do with our lack of social services and poor judicial system than anything else. And we don't need a constitutional convention to address those issues. This isn't something that I think we have much control over. I disagree. Universal background checks will not happen. We should limit guns to only people who can prove they are law abiding citizens, and mark the ID of every restricted person. This way there is no limitation or inconvenience to law abiding citizens, and no potential for a database of gun owners (which the republicans will also not ever allow). Our system is very slow moving, I agree 100%. She's a big barge and she changes direction incredibly slowly.
You keep saying and telling yourself that but I'm here to tell you that might be changing faster than you think. Majority of states is not the majority of the people. Majority of the people want gun laws to change. Red States are turning Blue much quicker than people realize. I for one will continue to say major changes need to be made. I will not quit saying that until they are made. I know plenty of people who oppose changes but the number i know who want change overwhelmingly outnumber those who don't. Not science just the way i see it.
You keep arguing as though somebody in here is for no changes. I don't think anybody here has opposed changes.
How is stating the actual numbers even close to minimizing the death of school children? I have proposed solutions to help protect school children. I obviously would not have done so if I did not care about them. I will say this. It's getting pretty tiresome and irksome seeing your emotional and argumentative responses to what I keep trying steer toward a logical and noncombative policy discussion. I have let it go, as I understand this is an emotionally charged time. But as a mod, I would think you'd exercise a bit more self control. You don't get to freely imply that I don't care about these kids just because you disagree with my opinion on the solution.
Anybody who has a valid, unmarked ID is a law abiding citizen. Anybody who is found to be "dangerous" should get a weapons restriction added to their ID. Every state already has the ability to do this right now, so it is very simple to start doing this immediately. Then anybody can check before they sell, lend, or gift a weapon to anybody. Law Abiding Citizen Weapons Restricted Citizen
This is almost exactly what I've been advocating for. It says hardening doesn't work in cases when the shooter is a student at that school (which is most school shootings during school hours), though I think it's a good idea anyway, at least to the degree that our local schools have done so. Using a single door to enter and exit, locked to entry during school hours, ensure proper climate control is available. It really seems to help teachers keep a better handle on things. While more rare, the most devastating school shootings have been those in which an older kid who is not supposed to be there attacks younger kids. These are the cases in which hardening would be most helpful, and I think it's worth doing.
That's the simplest band aid, I guess. There isn't a silver bullet though. I think there needs to be gun reform, which is where we differ. It's going to have to come at the local/state level at least in the short term, but that's just my opinion. What fathoms me why this (or Columbine, or Sandy Hook for that matter) won't be the catalyst for the constitution convention, but alas, America is fucked in a lot of ways.
Not saying you don't care. I know you do. You keeping stating the numbers of school children killed in mass shootings and then follow that with things implying those numbers aren't big enough to worry about or don't require immediate big solutions. I get that you are not for gun control laws. I get it. There are things we agree on. We need to fix health care and poverty. We also need more short term solutions that can have immediate affect. Gun restrictions (not banning all guns or getting rid of the 2nd...that's stupid) would stop some of these shootings.
An immediate freeze on firearm sales to people under 21 would be a fine short term solution to me. You'll piss the real gun nuts off on the right that they're "taking away rights", and then the other extreme progressives on the left that "it's not enough!" That sounds like only 10% of our country, at most.
What most people are asking for amounts to but a small concession in the grand scheme of things. No one is taking away everyone's guns. People want the right to guns, but not the responsibility that comes with it. Instead of giving a small concession, there is no compromise at all.
I don't think these two are suggesting a silver bullet, in fact, it said there would need to be movement on a lot of fronts. But it all seems very doable, IMO. It would really just take funding. I've proposed gun reform. Which could happen at the national level and would not meet near the opposition, and would be incredibly easy to implement.
