Well, I suppose you mean the public mass shooting problem? I don't know if there are any real good answers. I do know that the answer is not to reduce the rights of law abiding citizens. I do know that the answer is not these "red flag" laws, which is essentially finding someone guilty of a crime before they commit it. I'm not a big NRA supporter (although I find myself increasingly sympathetic to their views), but their answer of "the best way to stop a bad man with a gun is for a good man with a gun to be nearby" seems the best approach to me. So, more events/public spaces are going to need more security. If you've ever gone to a Buccee's (particularly that one in Luling), you'll see they always have a Sheriff or some time of armed LEO there. That will raise costs, but inasmuch as people are choosing to be customers at that place, of their own free will, it's not a tax, so I could see this being a good solution. Getting to the heart of the problem, this is, in my view, a mental health crisis; rather than "we have too many guns" crisis. Solving that would take a big effort (and a long essay), but having more mental health counselors in high school and college would be a good first step. And as much as it runs contrary to my Libertarian philosophy, I would be ok with forcing some students, who seem to be at risk, to take counseling. We also need a better awareness of what is causing the mental health crisis. By and large, IMO, it's being brought on by the lack of family formation (ie, the shooters are the products of single parent families). We're not going to solve that overnight. But admitting that it is the causal problem is the key first step. Then, mental health resources, as described above. Whatever politician seeks to restrict gun rights is going to be in for a world of political hurt; and appropriately so. I was disappointed to see Rep. Crenshaw (who I generally admire) joining in on the ridiculous "red flag" stuff. Lastly, and speaking for myself, the answer is less time in public spaces. I know not everyone is "down" with that (and as a Libertarian, I generally like solitude, staying home and away from public events). But, remember the adage "nothing good happens after midnight"? That Ohio shooting was at 1 am in the morning. I think that Orlando shooting was late in the night/early morning as well. Obviously, the El Paso shooting was at a grocery store/shopping mall. Once again, the answer here is more/better security. This does expand the "police state" (which as a Libertarian, I deplore), but that impacts only people who choose to go to store/mall, and they would probably be happy to see the enhanced security. Anyway, my dos centavos.
WSJ Editorial Board this morning: Flagging Future Killers Some useful steps to identify and deter dangerous individuals. By The Editorial Board Aug. 6, 2019 7:04 pm ET The Dayton and El Paso shootings have spurred familiar calls for more gun control, and by all means let’s have a debate. But the focus should be on denying weapons to the potential killers rather than on gun laws that may be politically satisfying but won’t make much difference. Start with the calls for more “background checks,” which implies none now exist. Yet nearly all gun purchasers today have their backgrounds checked on the spot via the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). Most mass shooters obtained their guns through licensed dealers after checks, or from family members. The Dayton and El Paso killers, and the Gilroy, Calif., shooter of late July obtained their firearms legally. Democrats want to expand background checks to person-to-person sales, though policing that would be a challenge as most such sales could be done off the books. They also want to extend to 10 days from three the amount of time dealers must wait to get a response from the background check system before proceeding with a sale. Senators Pat Toomey (R., Pa.) and Joe Manchin (D., W.Va.) want background checks to cover unlicensed sales at gun shows and online, but exempt sales between friends and family. Congress should have that debate, but no one should think they would reduce the number of mass shootings. Most mass shooters don’t have a criminal history that would pop up in the background system. There is also no evidence that longer waiting periods reduce suicides, homicides or mass shootings. Determined killers can always get a weapon. A better path of deterrence would be to focus on identifying potential risks and separating them from the means of harm. The use of Big Data by law enforcement to identify patterns of dangerous activity would be helpful, as Holman Jenkins Jr. notes nearby. Congress can also look to overhaul federal privacy laws that are a barrier to reporting potential threats. These include the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (Hipaa) and the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (Ferpa). Federal law and Justice Department regulations disqualify individuals who have been committed to a mental institution or adjudicated as mentally deficient from owning firearms and are noted in the NICS checks. Yet state participation in NICS is voluntary, and many remain reluctant to submit health records for fear of violating Hipaa. A December 2018 report from the Federal Commission on School Safety noted that states and localities are also confused about when it is appropriate to share student records with officials or parents under Hipaa and Ferpa. The George W. Bush and Obama Administrations tried to clarify these rules related to public safety, but without apparent success. Congress should update them to reflect the danger from mass killers, and it can drag the 1974 Ferpa into the digital age, making data more easily manageable. Congress can also work with states and localities to pass emergency protection orders. Some 17 states and Washington, D.C., now have these “red flag” laws permitting police or family members to petition a judge to temporarily remove firearms from individuals deemed a danger to themselves or others. South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham this week said he has bipartisan support for legislation for grants to states enacting red-flag laws. Congress could also do a service by advising on model legislation. A good law would provide adequate due process that lets flagged individuals challenge the order; requires judges to rule on the basis of clear and compelling evidence; and includes criminal penalties for anyone bringing false accusations. Red-flag laws should also go beyond mere firearm confiscation. The mental-health lobby is a more formidable obstacle here than the gun lobby. Most states refuse to reform their involuntary commitment laws, making it impossible to provide help for the severely mentally ill. Yet if an individual is dangerous enough to strip of a constitutional right, the government should also insist on treatment, and in some cases temporary commitment to a psychiatric facility. There is no single answer to mass shootings, but most of the quick solutions on offer would provide false comfort. That’s true of gun restrictions short of outright bans or confiscation that would run afoul of the Second Amendment. The immediate priority should be to reform laws and practices to deny firearms to those who are a danger to the public. https://www.wsj.com/articles/flagging-future-killers-11565132691?mod=hp_opin_pos_1
I've posted my thoughts on this a number of times. But you'd be amazed that some of what I have suggested line up with what you listed. Phase 1: Increased/improved background checks. This should be the easiest to accomplish... a wide majority of Americans support this, as does law enforcement. Red flag laws. This one will likely happen soon. Restore laws preventing gun sales and ownership for people with mental health problems. Longer waiting periods. Again, the majority of people support this as does law enforcement. These "cooling off" periods don't prevent responsible gun owners from buying and owning guns, but simply help reduce and hopefully prevent crimes of passions (both against others and suicides). Mandatory gun safety training. Again, the vast majority of people favor (including the NRA). We require drivers to have driving training. Mandatory gun safety devices (trigger locks, gun safes). Hopefully this prevents the number of gun accidents (kids taking parents guns and unintentionally shooting someone or themselves. Also hopefully it cuts down on gun thefts. Phase 2: Assault weapon bans. Stop the manufacture and sale of new weapons. Offer trade-in programs for existing. Screw any argument built around "scary guns" and "this makes it an assault gun, but its the same as a ..." Cartridge limits. Sure, 20 rounds sounds like a reasonable starting point. Strengthening armor piercing bullet laws. It was legal to own and buy, but illegal to sell. But gun nuts found a way around this (Dagny Dagger bullets). Important addendum, all these need to be at the federal level (too easy for states to have more lenient laws, defeating the protection of any law.
I prefer 10, at least for removable magazines. I have a tubular on my .22 that holds 14, but it isn't removable, so you can't just detach and attach a new mag.
I'll just address this one point....The Dayton shooter shot 36 people in less than one minute before being stopped by "good guys with guns".
Sean Hannity's proposal: Using police and military, put an armed guard on the floor of every school and around the perimeter and in every hall of every mall, store and public place.
...you might consider that, for the purposes of making America great again (what with our current Orwellian reverence of the military properly applied)... ...this is simply acceptable losses. ...goes to show you how far some indignant people will go to make a "statement"... ...to heck with an ounce of prevention being worth more than a pound of cure... ...(that's that Pinko-Commie welfare state socialist talk)... ...let's just off as many people as we can and chalk it up to Darwinism or survival of the fittest or states rights... ...and if we're lucky, we can take out some of these PC morons or round-earthers or climate-change propagandists too...
Same thing with the Garlic Festival. Good guy with a gun is such a crock when it comes to mass shooters. They've already started mowing people down at that point, and what good would they be for people like the Vegas or UT shooters who choose to target from above. Good guy with a gun is far more valuable in a robbery or assault.
What trump says and what he does are two different things. In other words, trump lies, all the time, about everything.
What are those changes you're scared of again? Again, you're upset at a mayor for behavior the POTUS does tenfold practically every day so again this just seems like fake outrage. The fact that you got troll Astrodome liking your posts should tell you something. All you did was post that you're scared the direction the country is going in if Trump isn't re-elected and that what he's doing is just stepping on toes. Nothing more. But when a mayor who posts publicly available information about donors on Twitter, there's the real fake outrage. You're only upset when it affects you or could potentially affect you. You think the complaints people have of Trump are nothing to take seriously it seems. But when a Dem mayor does what our POTUS does, OUTRAGE! That to me is moronic. But you do you Mr. Conservative Idealism man. BTW what changes have I personally proposed on here other than respond to white nationalist trolls like dachuda and BruceAndre. These ilk are the supporters you're aligning yourself with. Seriously think on that. I know you're a sincere poster on here typically with your viewpoint so I won't troll you or anything. I really do find the huff and puff posted above just to be fake outrage when Trump and many examples of his own supporters are the ones igniting all this chaos is all. As far as how the Trump election has affected me personally, basically in the summer I get really brown and around Austin as I am half white/ Mexican with a very white sounding name. Yet, once that brown gets on me, on at least three occasions I've dealt with open racism from Trumpsters since 2016. So while when you get sun, you may turn pink or blister or whatever, I turn brown and apparently that's a bad thing to more people in this country than I've realized. Non-provoked from my end as well. Just walking groceries up with a cart back to my truck. Instances like that. So yea, Trump winning has affected me. It's forced me to smile at those racist dolts, laugh at their racism and really piss them off with a, "God bless you," and a smile.
...okay...? ...uhm...correct me if I'm wrong (PLEASE)...but... ...I thought the mantra was to make America great again... ...not to make America like Beirut again...? ...but I suppose if we're no longer going to be the leaders of the "free world"... ...and we've always been besties with Israel... ...couldn't hurt to take a page from their book on all this... ...a book that isn't the Torah, I mean...
He couldn't even specify what things he's scared of Non-Repubs doing in that long rant and that I'm the one exposed by Trump or something. Brilliant stuff.
Even beyond the horrible message this sends, even from a tactical sense, there are not enough available police and military, and how are they going to get paid for such duty, and what happens to law enforcement and military protection while they are patrolling schools and malls, sores, etc.?
-Need guns to self police a police state autocratic government -Need Police to create police state to police guns who police a police state government Makes sense.
