Can we have a rational discussion about guns and why the typical arguments for gun control and its implementation won't work?

[GO-NAD!]

Do parental responsibilities have a time limit? If the shooter has had long-term mental health issues, I would think not- I have known people whose kids were well into adulthood and were cared for by the family- I don't see why this would be different. At the very least, they should make sure the child's mental health issues are dealt with in a constructive way.

In a legal sense? Absolutely. Regardless, if the allegations are true, their denial of their kid's declared identity would have inhibited their ability to be of much practical help. What they should have done vice what they did is peripheral, really. Readily available and easily purchased firearms is far more germane.
Nashville school shooting: Claims Audrey Hale was rejected by family who ‘couldn’t accept’ trans identity - NZ Herald

The system used for vetting gun buyers is far too easy to abuse and there aren't enough checks & balances.

No argument with that.

I think "Because I want seven guns" has stopped being a good reason for buying them.

No argument with that.

In his article, Klass includes-

"
False Claim 5: Gun control doesn’t work. Just look at Chicago!

How would you explain the much higher rate of knife homicides in the US vs UK? It has to be something other than access since every home in both places has knives, right?

This is one of the most persistent—and stupidest—claims that America’s pro-gun advocates point to. They take an American city with strict gun regulations, point to its high rate of gun violence, and then say “See, gun control doesn’t work! If it did, Chicago would be the safest city in the US!”

There are two glaring problems with this argument. The first is obvious: cities have larger populations, more crime, and more gangs than sparsely populated areas (this is true everywhere in the world). But the second flaw is more important: the “Chicago argument” compares ineffective patchwork gun control to real gun control."

He then goes on to say "South Chicago is roughly five miles from Indiana, where there are virtually no meaningful gun restrictions. It’s a fifteen minute drive. One Indiana gun shop has been directly linked to 850 firearms that were used to commit crimes in Chicago. People just hop in the car and buy a gun outside of the Chicago city limits.".

This completely ignores the private gun sales that are responsible for most shootings and if someone wants a gun, they don't need to make that drive- they can just buy it in the city. If they can't buy a gun legally in Illinois, crossing the state line won't make a difference because it's a national gun application, not local.

The 'We Need Gun Control' and 'We need to fix the people' camps need to find some common ground if this is ever going to be slowed- it's not just one or the other.

I saw that NC no longer requires private gun sellers to purchase a permit from the Sheriff's office, at the crippling cost of FIVE DOLLARS. 2022 gun homicides increased 49% over 2021- I don't see this going well.

What exactly does North Carolina’s repeal of pistol purchase permit laws mean?

RALEIGH, N.C. (WGHP) — North Carolina will no longer require anyone buying or selling a handgun to get a pistol purchase permit from their local sheriff’s office, eliminating the sole backgro…

myfox8.com

I'm not sure what point you're making here. He probably ignored private sales as contributory to gun crime in Chicago because it doesn't really add anything to his argument. Even if there were no private gun sales in taking place in Chicago, one only has to take that fifteen minute drive to get one. His point being, local gun control laws aren't effective when it's easy to get guns elsewhere. I believe that's an argument you have made before, isn't it?

 

[highfigh]

In a legal sense? Absolutely. Regardless, if the allegations are true, their denial of their kid's declared identity would have inhibited their ability to be of much practical help. What they should have done vice what they did is peripheral, really. Readily available and easily purchased firearms is far more germane.
Nashville school shooting: Claims Audrey Hale was rejected by family who ‘couldn’t accept’ trans identity - NZ Herald


No argument with that.


No argument with that.



I'm not sure what point you're making here. He probably ignored private sales as contributory to gun crime in Chicago because it doesn't really add anything to his argument. Even if there were no private gun sales in taking place in Chicago, one only has to take that fifteen minute drive to get one. His point being, local gun control laws aren't effective when it's easy to get guns elsewhere. I believe that's an argument you have made before, isn't it?

Not only in the legal sense, they should shoulder some responsibility in a moral sense, too- being rejected by family will be a large factor in this and I wouldn't want to have to live with this on my conscience, if I were them.

That's my point- ignoring pertinent facts because 'it doesn't add to his argument' is a poor reason to not use them. It's all related but by writing that people can drive fifteen minutes to buy a gun doesn't show the reality that the vast majority of guns used in homicides ARE NOT bought from gun stores. 850 guns came from one gun store, but no mention of the time period for the purchases or the crimes is offered.

WRT "Even if there were no private gun sales in taking place in Chicago, one only has to take that fifteen minute drive to get one.", again, not if someone has a criminal record that makes buying guns or possession illegal.

Two local gun stores here were known for the same reason and they were shut down- I really hope the FBI/ATF/local LEO and other agencies continue to close stores that are a problem and if possible, do more among private sellers, to stop this crap. I posted a link about a 12 year old who killed someone because the victim wouldn't sell the kid a gun- that's insane and the kid's parent(s) need to be held responsible.

None of this should happen and there's no justification for it. If I thought there was a chance that most guns could be taken out of circulation, I could be in favor of doing that but I don't believe we'll ever be that safe. The question remains- if guns go away, what will be done about the people who would use them since they'll still be here?

 

[Trell]

The main problem is the huge amount of weapons as well easy access, and that is proven by many research articles. That’s it, really.

The anti-gun-safety dudes should admit that they are fine with regular mass murder of children as long as they can keep their guns and carry them everywhere they want.

When I was attending school we had drills, but those where fire drills. I really feel sorry for children to have someone-is-coming-to-kill-us-with-assault-guns drills. Like they where living in some third-rate failed state, or something. But eventually these mass murders of school children will become so common that they won’t even be written about, except as a small notice in some local news paper.

 

[highfigh]

The main problem is the huge amount of weapons as well easy access, and that is proven by many research articles. That’s it, really.

The anti-gun-safety dudes should admit that they are fine with regular mass murder of children as long as they can keep their guns and carry them everywhere they want.

When I was attending school we had drills, but those where fire drills. I really feel sorry for children to have someone-is-coming-to-kill-us-with-assault-guns drills. Like they where living in some third-rate failed state, or something. But eventually these mass murders of school children will become so common that they won’t even be written about, except as a small notice in some local news paper.

Easy access is a huge problem and along with that is the problem of people who are willing to break the existing laws regarding sales of guns to criminals who have done something that disqualifies them from buying and possessing them. None of them will be affected by new gun laws and they already ignore the existing ones.

Anyone who is OK with murdering anyone should just march into a volcano.

We had fire drills, but we also had 'Duck And Cover' drills during the US/USSR Cold War. Nothing like telling kids age 5 to 12 years to hide under their desks in case the Soviets lob nuclear bombs, right?

 

[Trell]

Easy access is a huge problem and along with that is the problem of people who are willing to break the existing laws regarding sales of guns to criminals who have done something that disqualifies them from buying and possessing them. None of them will be affected by new gun laws and they already ignore the existing ones.

Anyone who is OK with murdering anyone should just march into a volcano.

We had fire drills, but we also had 'Duck And Cover' drills during the US/USSR Cold War. Nothing like telling kids age 5 to 12 years to hide under their desks in case the Soviets lob nuclear bombs, right?

Yeah, hiding under the table in case of a nuclear attack drills ain’t that uplifting either.

One difference to the free-guns-for-all-everywhere policy is that much effort has been, and still is, to limit the spread of those weapons. At great expenses, I might add.

 

[highfigh]

Yeah, hiding under the table in case of a nuclear attack drills ain’t that uplifting either.

One difference to the free-guns-for-all-everywhere policy is that much effort has been, and still is, to limit the spread of those weapons. At great expenses, I might add.

What makes you think guns are free? Might be close to free from some private sellers, though.

Too bad a drug can't be created that makes someone physically ill when they touch a gun, bullets, etc the way Anabuse does for hard core alcoholics.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Not only in the legal sense, they should shoulder some responsibility in a moral sense, too- being rejected by family will be a large factor in this and I wouldn't want to have to live with this on my conscience, if I were them.

Well, since it's highly unlikely that these parents bear any legal responsibility, the question of whether they bear any moral responsibility is pretty much moot. Do they feel any guilt? Who knows and it won't bring those six lives back.

That's my point- ignoring pertinent facts because 'it doesn't add to his argument' is a poor reason to not use them. It's all related but by writing that people can drive fifteen minutes to buy a gun doesn't show the reality that the vast majority of guns used in homicides ARE NOT bought from gun stores. 850 guns came from one gun store, but no mention of the time period for the purchases or the crimes is offered.

WRT "Even if there were no private gun sales in taking place in Chicago, one only has to take that fifteen minute drive to get one.", again, not if someone has a criminal record that makes buying guns or possession illegal.

Two local gun stores here were known for the same reason and they were shut down- I really hope the FBI/ATF/local LEO and other agencies continue to close stores that are a problem and if possible, do more among private sellers, to stop this crap. I posted a link about a 12 year old who killed someone because the victim wouldn't sell the kid a gun- that's insane and the kid's parent(s) need to be held responsible.

Gun laws are broken in Japan, the United Kingdom, and within the EU. There are still criminal gangs who carry firearms. But there are far fewer of them, because it’s very difficult to source an illegal weapon—particularly in places that have few firearms in circulation. Think about it with, say, a bazooka. Do some criminal gangs and militias still sometimes get their hands on bazookas? Sure. Is it a good thing that it’s really difficult to get one because of laws? Absolutely.

However, it is possible that the gun advocates may be right about one thing: around the edges gun law changes aren’t going to solve this problem, because it will still be easy to get a gun, including for criminals. Pandora’s Box has already been opened—and there are a hell of a lot of guns in circulation in the United States.

So, while he might not emphasize it to your satisfaction, he certainly doesn't ignore it.

When the largest source of stolen guns is from parked cars, it's pretty clear that getting your hands isn't that difficult. The Largest Source of Stolen Guns? Parked Cars. - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

None of this should happen and there's no justification for it.

You're preaching to the choir, buddy.

If I thought there was a chance that most guns could be taken out of circulation, I could be in favor of doing that but I don't believe we'll ever be that safe. The question remains- if guns go away, what will be done about the people who would use them since they'll still be here?

There's plenty that can be done.

In Canada, an "Approval To Transport" is required to transport a restricted firearm (which includes handguns). You need it to even purchase that handgun, because you have to take it home from the shop. You need one to take it to the range/gun club, which is pretty much the only place you can take it to, other than home. Said membership is a requirement. You also need to take the most direct route between those locations. It must be in a lockable container. While you can leave it in the vehicle unattended, it should be for a good reason - stop for gas, pee, whatever.

If you left that firearm in the vehicle overnight in your driveway and it was stolen, better lawyer up. You may avoid a negligent storage charge/conviction, but it will be a bumpy/expensive ride, regardless.

Asking people not to be a$$holes does nothing helpful.

 

[highfigh]

Well, since it's highly unlikely that these parents bear any legal responsibility, the question of whether they bear any moral responsibility is pretty much moot. Do they feel any guilt? Who knows and it won't bring those six lives back.

So, while he might not emphasize it to your satisfaction, he certainly doesn't ignore it.

When the largest source of stolen guns is from parked cars, it's pretty clear that getting your hands isn't that difficult. The Largest Source of Stolen Guns? Parked Cars. - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

You're preaching to the choir, buddy.

There's plenty that can be done.

In Canada, an "Approval To Transport" is required to transport a restricted firearm (which includes handguns). You need it to even purchase that handgun, because you have to take it home from the shop. You need one to take it to the range/gun club, which is pretty much the only place you can take it to, other than home. Said membership is a requirement. You also need to take the most direct route between those locations. It must be in a lockable container. While you can leave it in the vehicle unattended, it should be for a good reason - stop for gas, pee, whatever.

If you left that firearm in the vehicle overnight in your driveway and it was stolen, better lawyer up. You may avoid a negligent storage charge/conviction, but it will be a bumpy/expensive ride, regardless.

Asking people not to be a$$holes does nothing helpful.

Parents can and should be prosecuted when they display indifference to the problems that lead to violence and that should be increased. Parents are failing to raise their kids to be responsible members of society and it's clear that not enough are instilling discipline in a meaningful way.

People are proving their stupidity when they leave guns in cars, waiting for someone to steal them. That isn't being addressed, other than news reports and sternly-worded comments by a few politicians but nothing is being done about it, AFAIK. This needs big fines and I don't give a rat's a$$ if gun lovers and NRA morons hate it. They may as well leave the doors unlocked and the gun on the seat.

Too many people want to play 'Army' and 'Doomsday Prepper' without having a thought about whether they're acting responsibly. Have you seen much about Sovereign Citizens? That's another part of the equation that needs to be eliminated. YouTube has a lot of videos with these nimrods being arrested and most of the ones I have watched showed the police finding at least one gun in the car.

The Approval to Transport is part of having a Concealed Carry Permit- if the gun is in a vehicle, it must not be accessible, loaded and the ammunition is to be stored away from the firearm(s). I would have no problem if they add a requirement for non CCP holders to use a locked box while transporting and for all when leaving firearms in a vehicle. What's happening now isn't working and I posted an example of a gun that was stolen from a former MKE cop when he left it in his girlfriends' glove box. Leaving it in a car overnight is just stupidity and I think any permits should be suspended, or more.

Who said anything about asking?

Too many of the accused have been let out on bail or bond, only to commit violent crimes- this is changing here and I hope it changes everywhere. Kenneth Twyman is a good example of this.

I agree with your other points.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Parents can and should be prosecuted when they display indifference to the problems that lead to violence and that should be increased. Parents are failing to raise their kids to be responsible members of society and it's clear that not enough are instilling discipline in a meaningful way.

What would you charge them with?

People are proving their stupidity when they leave guns in cars, waiting for someone to steal them. That isn't being addressed, other than news reports and sternly-worded comments by a few politicians but nothing is being done about it, AFAIK. This needs big fines and I don't give a rat's a$$ if gun lovers and NRA morons hate it. They may as well leave the doors unlocked and the gun on the seat.

Too many people want to play 'Army' and 'Doomsday Prepper' without having a thought about whether they're acting responsibly. Have you seen much about Sovereign Citizens? That's another part of the equation that needs to be eliminated. YouTube has a lot of videos with these nimrods being arrested and most of the ones I have watched showed the police finding at least one gun in the car.

The Approval to Transport is part of having a Concealed Carry Permit- if the gun is in a vehicle, it must not be accessible, loaded and the ammunition is to be stored away from the firearm(s). I would have no problem if they add a requirement for non CCP holders to use a locked box while transporting and for all when leaving firearms in a vehicle. What's happening now isn't working and I posted an example of a gun that was stolen from a former MKE cop when he left it in his girlfriends' glove box. Leaving it in a car overnight is just stupidity and I think any permits should be suspended, or more.

Who said anything about asking?

Too many of the accused have been let out on bail or bond, only to commit violent crimes- this is changing here and I hope it changes everywhere. Kenneth Twyman is a good example of this.

I agree with your other points.

Concealed Carry Permit isn't a thing here. Absolutely verboten. Anyway, I thought concealed carry meant on your person.

I suspect that the number of firearms being left in vehicles and subsequently stolen may reflect the ubiquity of firearms and being regarded as just another inanimate object, like a hammer, a phone, a coffee maker, etc. No special regard is given it because it's always there. You know, familiarity breeds contempt.

 

[highfigh]

What would you charge them with?

Concealed Carry Permit isn't a thing here. Absolutely verboten. Anyway, I thought concealed carry meant on your person.

I suspect that the number of firearms being left in vehicles and subsequently stolen may reflect the ubiquity of firearms and being regarded as just another inanimate object, like a hammer, a phone, a coffee maker, etc. No special regard is given it because it's always there. You know, familiarity breeds contempt.

I admit that it's probably a reach to charge parents for what a 28 year old does, but they didn't seem to have a clue about what she was hiding in THEIR home. Granted, many houses have a lot of hiding places and it's not easy to guess where something is hidden, but in 28 years, they should have come up with a plan to be aware of what their daughter was doing.

Here, transporting guns AND ammunition is allowed, but only if it's done with them being separated in a vehicle and not easy to load/fire, e.g., loaded magazines and a gun in a case, duffle bag, etc. Someone with a CCP can transport loaded guns, loaded magazines and boxes of ammunition where they want, aside from places where it's prohibited. The theory seems to be that someone with a CCP has gone through some level of training that drills some concepts into their heads, namely, safety. In some cases, it may be reduced to "Try not to shoot anyone who isn't trying to kill you", but instructors' personal views aren't the same from person to person.

Legal/illegal concealed carry involves being in or out of a vehicle because a gun can be hidden in the seat cushions, glove box, under the seat, console, etc- how it's concealed doesn't matter if someone doesn't have the permit.

Leaving unsecured, loaded weapons in vehicles needs to come with very harsh penalties. That's just a stupid thing to do. It assumes a level of trust that is completely unreasonable.

Criminals break into cars because they know how irresponsible people are and if they don't find what they want, they move on to the next row of cars. They even leave purses, wallets, case & loose credit cards because that's not their aim. With fifty bucks, they can buy some drugs or save up for a gun, with a gun, they can rob a store or carjack a vehicle and sell it for a couple of thousand dollars.

Check this crap out-

10-year-old and man arrested in shooting that hurt teen

13-year-old treated for serious injuries at hospital, according to police.

www.wisn.com

 

[GO-NAD!]

The link heading is clickbait-y. They haven't 'banned' travel to the US. They have however, issued travel advisories concerning travel to the US.

7 countries with travel bans against the US | Miami Herald

 

[Mikado463]

sadly, this country has forgotten how to get tough on crime ..........

 

[cpp]

Wow !, so Texas thinks that changing the age limit from 18-21 is going to help with gun crime in Texas. Well I hate to be a downer, but anyone regardless of age can go onto the streets of pretty much any city in the US, if ya know where to go and buy any type of gun you want. Real criminal mind type of people could careless about age limits, gun laws and laws in general.

 

[Trell]

As of 7 May 2023 USA, has had on average at least one mass shooting a day. For mass killings it averages more than once a week.

Clearly there are too few guns so that decent and law-abiding citizens can defend themselves. /S

>>>After a series of shootings and other attacks, 2023 is on track to be the worst in recent history for mass killings in the US.

Mass killings are defined as incidents in which four or more people are killed, not including the shooter or other type of perpetrator. According to data from the Gun Violence Archive, the US is on pace for 60 mass killings this year. There were 31 in 2019, 21 in 2020, 28 in 2021 and 36 in 2022.

The US is seeing on average more than one mass killing weekly.

As of 7 May 2023, there had been 202 mass shootings – defined by the archive as involving at least four people killed or injured by firearms, excluding the shooter – since the beginning of the year. ...<<<

US on track to set record in 2023 for mass killings after series of shootings

Country is seeing an average of more than one mass killing weekly – amid little political prospect of meaningful gun control

www.theguardian.com

 

[panteragstk]

Wow !, so Texas thinks that changing the age limit from 18-21 is going to help with gun crime in Texas. Well I hate to be a downer, but anyone regardless of age can go onto the streets of pretty much any city in the US, if ya know where to go and buy any type of gun you want. Real criminal mind type of people could careless about age limits, gun laws and laws in general.

It would have helped in Uvalde. The kid had just turned 18. If he couldn't get a legal weapon at 18 then he would have had to have found an illegal source. Chances are he wouldn't have found a gun.

Instead we got what we got.

Would the age range going up be enough? Not even a little bit, but it's a start.

 

[Trell]

It would have helped in Uvalde. The kid had just turned 18. If he couldn't get a legal weapon at 18 then he would have had to have found an illegal source. Chances are he wouldn't have found a gun.

Instead we got what we got.

Would the age range going up be enough? Not even a little bit, but it's a start.

This is what I see (not directed at you, @panteragstk): You find daily mass shootings using an assault rifle (designed to kill people) an acceptable price to pay for your hobby to carry weapons everywhere you want. You give your prayers while parents of a child can't identify their child because the head exploded when an AR-15 bullet entered it.

This is what so many you supports.

 

[Danzilla31]

It would have helped in Uvalde. The kid had just turned 18. If he couldn't get a legal weapon at 18 then he would have had to have found an illegal source. Chances are he wouldn't have found a gun.

Instead we got what we got.

Would the age range going up be enough? Not even a little bit, but it's a start.

Just a couple thoughts.

If they really wanted to have done gun control they should have started it a long time ago. We now have more guns then citizens in the United States. There's no way gun control now is going to do anything but arm criminals and put good citizens in more danger to be at there mercy.

The democrats have a problem with enforcing law and order in there policies and until they get serious about actually prosecuting crime NO ONE is going to let them put more control on guns. Perfect example we just had a vote this election on prop A here in San Antonio. One of its main sticking points was citations for theft up to $750 and property damage up to $2500. Are you kidding me? Luckily it got destroyed in the vote people are learning. Austin just voted in a Prop A guess what there's was? To increase they're police staff and budget by an additional 450 million dollars. Because of the damage that type of Californian policies as I like to call it had on the city the last few years. The policies name was save our city. Get real on enforcing the law people and I'll happily get behind some realistic gun control policies.

Third people have this Big Daddy government is going to protect me mentality. It never works. People need to learn to protect themselves. If everyone one is armed and would have reacted to that shooter at the mall this never would have happened to the degree it did. Just ask yourself where are these types of shooters targeting? Shopping makes schools they are targeting gun free zones. Its not rocket science. The predators are hunting the sheep. So stop being a sheep. Stop letting the lions hunt you at the waterhole.

4rth we send billions upon billions all over the world how about spending billions upon our security at schools at mass transit areas. Even if you banned all guns tommorow it wouldn't make this better it would make mass shootings worse. Because all the loonies would know nobody has a gun right now. It would take over a decade to calm this violence down. So before we start banning how about we have security set in place to make the transition over? How about we actually invest in our own security and infrastructure for American citizens

And how about spending some of that paper money democrats like to print on this nations mental health?????? Cmon we can send all types of money overseas but we can't spend that money here on our damaged education and mental health infrastructure especially after what happened to us after the pandemic?

STILL DESPITE ALL THAT BEING SAID.

I am right now all for banning AR 15 type rifles and other similar gear to the general public increasing universal back ground checks and mental health checks and if not banning them the. upping the age limit to owning those types of rifles and gear to the age if 25.

But implementing the ideas I mentioned above AT THE SAME TIME would sure be nice.

 

[cpp]

It would have helped in Uvalde. The kid had just turned 18. If he couldn't get a legal weapon at 18 then he would have had to have found an illegal source. Chances are he wouldn't have found a gun.

Instead we got what we got.

Would the age range going up be enough? Not even a little bit, but it's a start.

Sad but true

 

[Trell]

Just a couple thoughts.

If they really wanted to have done gun control they should have started it a long time ago. We now have more guns then citizens in the United States. There's no way gun control now is going to do anything but arm criminals and put good citizens in more danger to be at there mercy.

The democrats have a problem with enforcing law and order in there policies and until they get serious about actually prosecuting crime NO ONE is going to let them put more control on guns. Perfect example we just had a vote this election on prop A here in San Antonio. One of its main sticking points was citations for theft up to $750 and property damage up to $2500. Are you kidding me? Luckily it got destroyed in the vote people are learning. Austin just voted in a Prop A guess what there's was? To increase they're police staff and budget by an additional 450 million dollars. Because of the damage that type of Californian policies as I like to call it had on the city the last few years. The policies name was save our city. Get real on enforcing the law people and I'll happily get behind some realistic gun control policies.

Third people have this Big Daddy government is going to protect me mentality. It never works. People need to learn to protect themselves. If everyone one is armed and would have reacted to that shooter at the mall this never would have happened to the degree it did. Just ask yourself where are these types of shooters targeting? Shopping makes schools they are targeting gun free zones. Its not rocket science. The predators are hunting the sheep. So stop being a sheep. Stop letting the lions hunt you at the waterhole.

4rth we send billions upon billions all over the world how about spending billions upon our security at schools at mass transit areas. Even if you banned all guns tommorow it wouldn't make this better it would make mass shootings worse. Because all the loonies would know nobody has a gun right now. It would take over a decade to calm this violence down. So before we start banning how about we have security set in place to make the transition over? How about we actually invest in our own security and infrastructure for American citizens

And how about spending some of that paper money democrats like to print on this nations mental health?????? Cmon we can send all types of money overseas but we can't spend that money here on our damaged education and mental health infrastructure especially after what happened to us after the pandemic?

STILL DESPITE ALL THAT BEING SAID.

I am right now all for banning AR 15 type rifles and other similar gear to the general public increasing universal back ground checks and mental health checks and if not banning them the. upping the age limit to owning those types of rifles and gear to the age if 25.

But implementing the ideas I mentioned above AT THE SAME TIME would sure be nice.

Sigh. :facepalm:

 

[Mikado463]

Just a couple thoughts.

If they really wanted to have done gun control they should have started it a long time ago. We now have more guns then citizens in the United States. There's no way gun control now is going to do anything but arm criminals and put good citizens in more danger to be at there mercy.

The democrats have a problem with enforcing law and order in there policies and until they get serious about actually prosecuting crime NO ONE is going to let them put more control on guns. Perfect example we just had a vote this election on prop A here in San Antonio. One of its main sticking points was citations for theft up to $750 and property damage up to $2500. Are you kidding me? Luckily it got destroyed in the vote people are learning. Austin just voted in a Prop A guess what there's was? To increase they're police staff and budget by an additional 450 million dollars. Because of the damage that type of Californian policies as I like to call it had on the city the last few years. The policies name was save our city. Get real on enforcing the law people and I'll happily get behind some realistic gun control policies.

Third people have this Big Daddy government is going to protect me mentality. It never works. People need to learn to protect themselves. If everyone one is armed and would have reacted to that shooter at the mall this never would have happened to the degree it did. Just ask yourself where are these types of shooters targeting? Shopping makes schools they are targeting gun free zones. Its not rocket science. The predators are hunting the sheep. So stop being a sheep. Stop letting the lions hunt you at the waterhole.

4rth we send billions upon billions all over the world how about spending billions upon our security at schools at mass transit areas. Even if you banned all guns tommorow it wouldn't make this better it would make mass shootings worse. Because all the loonies would know nobody has a gun right now. It would take over a decade to calm this violence down. So before we start banning how about we have security set in place to make the transition over? How about we actually invest in our own security and infrastructure for American citizens

And how about spending some of that paper money democrats like to print on this nations mental health?????? Cmon we can send all types of money overseas but we can't spend that money here on our damaged education and mental health infrastructure especially after what happened to us after the pandemic?

STILL DESPITE ALL THAT BEING SAID.

I am right now all for banning AR 15 type rifles and other similar gear to the general public increasing universal back ground checks and mental health checks and if not banning them the. upping the age limit to owning those types of rifles and gear to the age if 25.

But implementing the ideas I mentioned above AT THE SAME TIME would sure be nice.

Dan, I see our little friend from Norway gave you a 'dumb' mark, congrats ! But then he gave one for me on a similar response. Perhaps if he lived here(thank God he doesn't) and actually knew LEO's and what they go through.............