There is an access problem with too many irresponsible people wanting and buying weapons.  But as a society, I think the US is pretty messed up and crazy amount of mix in our population. 

Responsible gun ownership is fine, but the NRA and its political constituents' refusal to bend in any way in the face of repeated innocent slaughter goes beyond irresponsible. There is a problem, has been for decades and it can't just be ignored or disregarded as "crazy be crazy, whatcha gonna do, right". When jarts injured people they were banned. When a guy used fertilizer to blow up a federal building, the sale and tracking of it was quickly regulated.

But jarts and fertilizer aren't in the Constitution, right? Firearms are in an amendment that also includes the words "well" and "regulated", you assume that leaves some latitude on the subject. Kids shouldn't be dying just so hobbyists can play with deadly weapons. And it's not just the availability of guns in the country, it's gun culture that the NRA has helped inflame. They are deadly weapons meant for responsible sport or self-defense, not the family x-mas card.

But nothing can be done until there is a reasonable dialogue that doesn't devolve into "from my cold dead hand" or "guns are bad". I'm not saying more regulation will eliminate all mass shootings, but if it keeps one mentally ill person from buying a gun legally, it's probably worth it (especially if access to mental health care is also denied). There is evidence that the 1994-2004 assault weapons ban reduced mass shooting incidents during that period, but the law was still circumvented by manufacturers and buyers. Doesn't mean we shouldn't regulate just because some people get around it. But it seems like Columbine has been inspiring deranged kids and hateful racists for 2 decades and we haven't been able to put the toothpaste back in the tube. We can't expect gun shops and convention booths to diagnose their potential sales anymore than a Nissan dealer can license drivers.

Republicans are instead fighting the phantom Fraudulent Voter, so we know they can regulate if they want to. When Reagan was shot everyone agreed that waiting a few days to get a gun was perfectly reasonable. But now it's easier for an 18 year-old to purchase firearms than it is to vote, and states are trying to make it so you take a gun just about anywhere (except an NRA convention, apparently). And you can't tell me it's because it's what the Founding Fathers wanted because they also didn't allow their wives to vote and also owned people.

What I don't understand is why an inanimate object is being demonized.  All the talk of "Do it for the children." doesn't mean a thing unless you do something to PROTECT the children.  People are up in arms about wanting to ban scary looking guns, but don't address the problem of what needs to be done for the children to protect/prevent these shootings.  

To start, armed guards around the schools, entry points with unseen metal detectors that lock down in front of and behind a detected object.  Yes, there will be many false readings due to toys and some metal objects needed for school, but with the access restriction the person would be literally encaged in bullet proof Lexan  and searched before entry.  Retired LEOS and military would likely be a good source of manpower. Doors locked down with only exit by using a security bar hooked up to the perimeter monitoring system.  No re-entry.  Roving patrols to check doors so that they remain locked (no teachers sneaking out for a smoke and leaving a door stop so they can come back in)

Vehicle entrance to schools would be monitored by security, if needed new, street side covered drives would be built.  Several of the 334 school shootings since 2000 involved students hit with projectiles while walking across the grounds.  Most didn't even pierce the skin, so they had to be fired from a fair distance.

We need to get rid of this "Gun Free" policy for schools.  Let people know that armed guards and/or staff are always on duty when children are present.

Of those 334, there were 204 with no fatalities, and many times the shooter was the only one wounded or killed (suicide) if there was a single fatality.

In the 2020s' there have been 74 school shootings.  Mostly under Biden.

In the 2010s' there were 241 school shootings.  Mostly under Obama.

In the 2000s' There were 69 school shootings.  More under Obama than Bush.

No accusations, just facts and figures, but you must remember that the studies vary widely on what exactly is a "school shooting".  Some studies only include ones that happen only on campus, some others include travel to and from school, and others include school functions even if it isn't on a campus, and shootings that happen "near" a school, even if it doesn't involve students.

I guess you could brand me as the guy who calls bullshit on those who want to ban an inanimate object, but doesn't call out for protecting the kids while at school.

Posted by: @jerry

What I don't understand is why an inanimate object is being demonized. 

Happy to repeat:

Being inanimate isn't a defense for being well-regulated,.

Also inanimate: butterfly knives, acid, pipe bomb, meth, radioactive waste, tank.

Most would agree not everyone should have access to these inanimate objects, and if they do, should be properly trained to ensure public safety. So, put that argument to bed.

Regarding the rest of your pitch, it sounds like a prison not a school. A lot of schools have metal detectors and armed guards and they are still open to possible attacks. Parkland had an armed guard who never entered the building during the attack. I went to school not worrying about this, maybe we can find out why that used to work instead of fortifying our schools.

Not to mention, this kind of security would be incredibly expensive for taxpayers where schools are already short on funds. So now you want to raise taxes? Just so anyone can get any gun?

I previously said I'm all for a reasonable conversation on the subject, but if you're going to attempt to tie mass shootings to GOP vs Democratic Presidential administrations it's clear you aren't interested. I have no idea where you got your stats from, but the blatant lack of cause and effect are a bastardization of interpreting statistics (for instance, most schools have only been open in the 2020s while Biden has been President, duh). I didn't agree with Trump, but I would never blame him for the slaughter of children.

Since decades (and presidential administrations) are arbitrary relating to these statistics, here are the year-by-year totals. The numbers don't match your generalizations. I call bullshit on you.

No one is trying to ban all (inanimate) guns, we are having a discussion about how to keep deadly inanimate objects out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them. And maybe which weapons are too dangerous and not necessary for public use.

Jerry, all of those steps that you propose to prevent school shooters almost sounds like an excuse to continue having school shootings.  I know I sound like an old fart, but in my day we just never needed measures like these.  The fact that you even list these steps probably reflects a subconscious acknowledgement on your part that we most certainly do have a problem with guns and firearm violence.  Does it not occur to you that with better and more reasonable gun laws we might not need any of these things?

The "inanimate object" thing - think about lead poisoning in municipal water supply systems.  Lead, by itself - sitting on a shelf somewhere poses no problem.  Having it in your water supply system is not acceptable.  Think of guns as "lead" and schools, parks, restaurants, churches, arenas etc as the "water supply".  Not the best analogy, but the fact that guns are so prevalent in society should be every bit as disconcerting as lead in water.

Why are gun people so spooked and angered at the idea of tighter restrictions on guns?  Most all of the mass shooters in recent years bought their guns legally.  Maybe real and deeper background checks could've turned up a tale from a teacher or former spouse about a cruel person prone to angry outbursts.  

Then there's the "good guys with guns" theory and line of thinking.  The entire, legally armed Police force of the city of Uvalde were standing right outside while this monster killed a bunch of 9 and 10 year olds.  Maybe if the "monster" had been turned away at the gun dealer ... like a week or two earlier.

I have real trouble with a system that prohibits anyone under 21 years old from legally buying a beer but allowing someone aged 18 to legally and easily buy an automatic rifle. What could possibly go wrong with someone who is maybe a junior or senior in high school from having a deadly weapon in their hands?

Prone to emotional swings? Lack of maturity? Unaware of real life cause & effect based on their decisions? 

And yet, "Republican'ts" find it impossible to even stomach/consider legislating any modification of providing some level of common sense approach to who can/should be thoroughly checked out before allowing them to buy any number of weapons that end the lives of innocent schoolchildren (or others). People in a church, people in a grocery store, people in a Wal-Mart.

A Republican't suggestion to address the problem? "Arm the teachers!" Absolutely laughable.

Just today my Republican't governor said he still agrees 18 year olds in this state should be allowed to (specifically) buy an AR-15 because "almost all people here are law abiding." Tell that to the families of the eight people murdered in a department store in Omaha by a 19 year old with an automatic weapon.

To be clear, I'm a longtime registered independent who has voted for both parties depending on the particular candidate and their platform/ideas. But, for a variety of reasons it will be a cold day in hell before I vote for another Republican't. I may not vote for the democrat but I can no longer support the opposing party.

Right now in America, 50 people, Republicant's who line their campaign pockets with NRA donations are IMO holding an entire nation hostage when it comes to addressing any meaningful change in the mass slaughters happening everywhere in this country.

And now I just heard from a longtime member here whose daughter attends Iowa State University in Ames. Shooting at a church tonight just off campus, three dead. His daughter knew one of the victims.

Posted by: @oldcoot

And now I just heard from a longtime member here whose daughter attends Iowa State University in Ames. Shooting at a church tonight just off campus, three dead. His daughter knew one of the victims.

Tragic. @jerry do you think we also need to fortify churches, malls, and grocery stores just so crazy people can legally purchase guns on their 18th birthday? Maybe there's another solution that doesn't just escalate the problem.

A single mass-shooting event - the FIRST one - whenever that was -SHOULD have woken the entire nation.   A single event should have been enough!

There was another shooting outside a church last night - this following the one at a hospital just a day or so before.  I believe that we have had at least three since Uvalde - which came very soon after the supermarket shooting in Buffalo.  It has literally gotten to the point where when someone mentions "THE shooting" - you have to ask, "the one on Monday?  Tuesday?  Thursday?"  I use to ask, "how many will be too many?"  Now I wonder - for some people - how many will be enough?  I really hate posting in the Whipping Post forum, but I need to express how angry I feel at this problem.

@oldcoot Do you live in Ohio?

It may sound like I'm being petty, but people keep using the term "automatic rifle".  AR-15s and others are semi-automatic rifles.  They reload the chamber, but the trigger has to be pulled to fire again.

School safety is the top priority right now, not banning an inanimate object.  The items I proposed are to help keep the crazies out of the schools since the government doesn't want to keep them out of society in general.

When I went to school, you didn't know who was or wasn't armed.  A student walking down the hallway with a deer rifle wasn't even a cause for concern.  Now kids get expelled for doing the "finger gun" at another kid.  Clear plastic squirt guns get kids hit for the "zero tolerance rule".  A student can even TALK about what type of shotgun or rifle they have and they get at least detention.

We had firearms safety classes.  we had teachers we knew were carrying, but it didn't bother us.  We also had roving armed campus police, didn't bother us at all.

The big thing we didn't have, school shootings by the dozen.  We moved to the "safer, gentler" society.  We went to "gun free" zones.  We went to unlocking the doors to the sanitariums and sending the "poor, sick souls free".  We also went to the "better living through chemistry" generation.  So many people have been diagnosed with hundreds of types of mental illness that we say "we have a drug for that".  Problem is, the drugs sometimes don't work, and sometimes the drugs do more harm than good.

Look at the school and mass shootings in the past few decades.  How many of the shooters had been diagnosed with a type of mental illness.  So the big thing is right now we need to protect the kids from the crazies FIRST.  Then work on plans that will more than likely be extremely long range to help with the problem of the mentally ill.

We need the protections to be in place to PROTECT the children.  If you don't feel that we need to protect the kids with measures to keep out the crazies, then you obviously don't want to keep school kids alive.  Banning an inanimate object will not help solve the problem.

PS:  Read up on what the Uvalde shooter posted about why he chose the AR-15 to carry out his plan. 

Posted by: @jerry

.... Look at the school and mass shootings in the past few decades.  How many of the shooters had been diagnosed with a type of mental illness.  So the big thing is right now we need to protect the kids from the crazies FIRST.  Then work on plans that will more than likely be extremely long range to help with the problem of the mentally ill.

We need the protections to be in place to PROTECT the children.  If you don't feel that we need to protect the kids with measures to keep out the crazies, then you obviously don't want to keep school kids alive.  Banning an inanimate object will not help solve the problem.

PS:  Read up on what the Uvalde shooter posted about why he chose the AR-15 to carry out his plan. 

First of all, thank you for acknowledging that current laws are not keeping "crazies" from getting their mitts on firearms.  Good start on your behalf!

Now - PLEASE!  Can you tell us what "crazies" look like?  Thanks to the Governors of states like Texas and Georgia (where I reside) anybody over 18 can purchase and open-carry WITHOUT a license.  Does this model work for you?  Just yesterday I was in a public area (lots of tourists present - no idea what their mentality was) and saw a group of four men walking around with sidearms in belt holsters.  I don't know about you, but I couldn't look at them and tell if they were "crazies" or not.  Were these guys self-appointed "protectors of peace" or were they "crazies" waiting for a specific moment to begin carnage on an unsuspecting crowd?

Out of concern FOR these open-armed types - suppose a real and genuine "crazy" did emerge and open fire on the crowd and THEY began firing in retaliation.  When the Police do arrive - HOW are they going to discern between the "crazies" and the "good guys with guns"?  

What you propose is nothing short of trying to extinguish a fire with gasoline.  

"It may sound like I'm being petty, but people keep using the term "automatic rifle". AR-15s and others are semi-automatic rifles. They reload the chamber, but the trigger has to be pulled to fire again."

Yes it does sound petty, extremely so. Gosh, it just takes so much stamina and focus to pull that trigger again and again and again and again.

Posted by: @oldcoot

"It may sound like I'm being petty, but people keep using the term "automatic rifle". AR-15s and others are semi-automatic rifles. They reload the chamber, but the trigger has to be pulled to fire again."

Yes it does sound petty, extremely so. Gosh, it just takes so much stamina and focus to pull that trigger again and again and again and again.

Actually I think if gun control advocates want to be taken seriously they should be clear on the weapons they feel are unreasonable for the public to own and why. To my knowledge, automatic weapons are illegal, correct? AR15s are semi-automatic (it's not a continuous spray), but they still fire very rapidly and can create carnage in a shorter amount of time and more accurately than a hand gun. AR15s were included in the weapons ban from 1994-2004, and have been used in many mass shootings dating back to Columbine. I've read that's partially because of that history, it's developed a pedigree. But any time a product is involved in repeated carnage we take a closer look at whether the product presents a greater danger to the public.

I believe the point of acquisition is where we should be focusing. NRA and the GOP keep stating it's a "mental health" issue, but then propose no solutions. That's unacceptable. To the contrary, the GOP blocks access to health care and makes it easier to purchase and carry weapons. It's completely irresponsible. There's a problem and they are exacerbating it.

The 2nd amendment contains the words "well" and "regulated". The responsible thing would be to set up a screening system that keeps the mentally ill or young people from acquiring these weapons. If I was producing a product that was slaughtering children, it would be my duty to go the extra mile to ensure it's in the hands of responsible people. Extensive background checks, training, and licensing should be required for public safety.

Posted by: @rusty

we have had at least three since Uvalde - which came very soon after the supermarket shooting in Buffalo.  It has literally gotten to the point where when someone mentions "THE shooting" - you have to ask, "the one on Monday?  Tuesday?  Thursday?"

Most recent one, 3 dead, 11 wounded last night in entertainment district in Philadelphia.

"We must curb gun violence, we must have tighter background checks......" same verbiage Each And Every Time, & nothing ever changes - nothing ever will, the NRA & other lobbies have too much clout - they want their $$$

Gun violence will always be with us. There are a lot of delusional deranged down on their luck people out there w/twisted brains mad at the world & ready to take it out on whoever.....

Posted by: @oldcoot

"It may sound like I'm being petty, but people keep using the term "automatic rifle". AR-15s and others are semi-automatic rifles. They reload the chamber, but the trigger has to be pulled to fire again."

Yes it does sound petty, extremely so. Gosh, it just takes so much stamina and focus to pull that trigger again and again and again and again.

Coot - also the fact that even semi-automatic weapons were nowhere to be found when the 2nd Amendment was dreamed up.

I attend historic reenactments (Revolutionary War) about twice a year.  Authentic reproductions as well a genuine firearms from the period are used.  I have watched these period firearms being loaded and fired.  It actually takes an experienced user of the weapon almost 4 minutes (and that's going FAST) to powder and prime the weapon for firing.  Each of these reloads gives you exactly ONE shot.  Not only that, the weapons were woefully inaccurate beyond a range of about 30 feet. 

These are the types of weapons that were around when the 2nd Amendment was written.  Had the founding fathers had any clue as to what types of weaponry would be available to the general public a couple of centuries down the road I honestly believe that they would have had some serious second thoughts.  I have honestly considering trying to speak to Congress to propose a ban on death rays, laser beams and backyard ICBMs - just in case these become readily available in the next century.  I'm as serious as cancer when I say this.