Equating mass shootings with drunk driving is disingenuous. How many drunk drivers have you read about driving into an elementary school killing students in the school?

What did Australia do that resulted in an "absolute direct stop of mass shootings?"

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

The majority of these seem to be committed by young men. I'd say it's fairly obvious that it is too easy for young men to get firearms, and, really, there aren't very many good reasons for them to have them. Painting with a broad brush but that's the only way to get anything done. FWIW, I purchased (strawman, through my dad) my first handgun when I was 17 (it was the 3rd firearm in my collection) so I'm being a hypocrite maybe, but looking back there was no real "need" there, just country fun, and this was long before Columbine.

Strict liability for anyone who owns a firearm. This means, if I own a weapon and keep it responsibly secured in a high end gun safe (which I do), yet someone breaks into my house while I'm on vacation and steals it by cutting open the safe...I'm liable for whatever deeds are done with it....I could become an accessory to murder. I think this would make a lot of people re-think their ownership and storage habits, making ownership a lot less common and storage a lot more secure.

We’re not going to make any headway on gun violence unless we start making incremental changes. We won’t be able to guarantee perfect results, right? We’re making a more perfect union, so let’s work on improving without getting caught up in perfectionism.

Fewer guns, waiting periods, and liability insurance requirements seem like a reasonable first effort. Who is campaigning on unfettered gun rights? The GOP.

Vote blue.

A mandatory buyback. OK. Gun registry. OK. Both would require changing the constitution. OK, it's possible.

Australia's plan reduced privately owned firearms by 20%.

Assuming the same success rate here, which is doubtful, you're left with maybe 300 million guns in circulation.

It seems reasonable that people with ill intentions would be less likely to comply with the law.

What do you think would happen with a door to door campaign to confiscate a couple hundred million US owned firearms?

Maybe people would bluster but then comply. Maybe there would be limited violence. Maybe there would be civil war or even secession?

What's your best guess?

All of this is to get rid of guns.

What other options are there to reduce mass shootings?

It’s not just the gun laws. You have gun culture. You have people that worship the 2nd Amendment.

I can get a gun, it’s not that difficult.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

I don’t think you saying that gun owners may start murdering people and not comply with the law is a great argument against gun control. Isn’t that a great argument fo gun control? We need to get guns out of these maniacs hands and the sooner the better.

What are gun owners currently doing to prevent these maniacs from getting guns? Or are they cheering them on with big rally’s?

It’s ok to just admit that Americans are unwilling to do the things that other countries have done with measured success.

But if nothing happened after Sandy Hook, then nothing will ever change here in the US. So… thoughts and prayers to the families, and move on to the next one.

Zeroism is an impossible goal. It's stupid to even try. But that is not an excuse to do nothing.

Maybe I wasn't clear, but I do believe there would be incredible amounts of violence against law enforcement (or the military) or whomever would be actually going door to door to confiscate guns in America. Law enforcement of some sort would be walking into literally millions of ambush scenarios and would face a pretty incredible armed resistance from non compliant citizens.

Why would they not follow the law? Isn’t it really bad that there are all these people that are willing to murder and not follow the law?

In the highly unlikely scenario that the constitution is amended and there is a ban on most kinds of guns, I think most citizens would comply because - by definition - a majority of the population would be in favor of this. Most gun owners would hand in their guns and those that don’t would face the risk of being caught with an illegal gun at a later date. I don’t see a scenario where law enforcement officers are going door to door searching for and confiscating guns.

But it’s all hypothetical because it’s never going to happen.

In the US, now?
Nothing. We could have 2-4 such school shootings a day for the next 3 years and the republicans would still fight tooth nail and for their lives to keep the gun laws as loose as possible. No concessions from them. Ever. Prove me wrong.

I don't think many of us would be willing to stop driving cars in order to eliminate drunk drivers. For responsible gun owners, that's what it would feel like to be forced to give up their guns. I think many people would refuse.

Some concessions may be available for capacity limitations if I were to guess. California hasn't had much of a revolution with significant capacity restrictions. Having said that I am aware of many (relatively speaking) people that either move away from CA or simply would never move to CA due to gun laws. If the same laws were attempted nationally, and people wouldn't have the choice to simply move or avoid a certain area, there would likely be significantly more resistance or push back.

If you’re right, the number of gun people who don’t have respect for the law is astounding to me. Those criminals deserve punishment. They should have just complied.

I don't think you can place it completely on Republican leadership, even though it's easy to demonize them (especially in the LR). Even without Republican leadership concessions, and specifically against their wishes, there are certain states with significant gun restrictions. It has happened. There are examples. The bottom line is that the gun control advocates simply don't have the votes across the country.

I'm sure people said the same thing about the Civil Rights movement.

This kid, who by some initial accounts, seems to have been a little troubled, walked into a gun store upon turning 18 years old, and had no issue buying a gun. I think the majority of the population is in favor of some controls that would stop this kid being able to have done that. There is only one political party he’ll bent on stopping such measures being implemented. Stop kidding yourself.

There is no line. If there was, we crossed it a long time ago.

Absolutely nothing will change.

---

Suffer Well.

I would fully support buyback and registry.

Buyback would be more successful if done at 5x market rate or something. Expensive? Yes. Worth it? Yes.

---

Eliot
blog thing - strava thing

People said the same thing about mandatory seat belt laws, but now everyone just gets on and puts their seat belts on, for the most part. Most people have better things to do with their lives, even current gun owners.

Disagree. NRA has owned the republican party for the past 30-40 years. There will be no action.

It's no coincidence that the Russian intelligence targeted the NRA.

What kind of controls exactly? Would they have helped in this case?

What are the unintended consequences to the 99.99999% of gun owners who never commit acts of violence with a firearm?

Assume that you can look at the issue with genuine interest in reform without obliterating the rights of those who don't share your view/bias.

I'd google the guy but I don't want to give the pathetic cunt the satisfaction/notoriety that he obviously sought.

The only reference to the actual gun(s) I've seen said "a handgun and possibly a rifle".

Nice catch, Einstein.

A democracy is a country where the will of the people is expressed through its laws. The vast majority of Americans support common sense gun laws. It silly that you think a constitutional amendment is necessary for common sense gun laws. It’s silly that you think threats of violence from the gun-loving criminals is a valid argument against common sense gun laws.

What other pretend hurdle is there in the way of gun law reform? Our hands are tied and we have to accept gun deaths because…?

It’s the GOP and gun-loving culture. Fuck that bullshit.

If a person votes for a 2A candidate, then that person is voting for gun violence. Firearms became the leading cause of death among children and teenagers in the United States in 2020, according to new research using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The finding comes after a record 45,222 people died from firearm-related injuries in 2020 in the U.S., according to a letter published in the New England Journal of Medicine. Most of the deaths were from firearm homicide. https://www.usatoday.com/...ens-2020/7432860001/

Our hands are not tied. We have to vote the bullshit gun-nuts out.