We are open to all suggestions that aren’t stupid. Limiting doors in schools, blaming Ritalin, blaming video games, hardening every school in America (with what money?) - all stupid.
Anything that is not stupid and actually has a chance of having an effect I am all ears for.
It hasn’t been seriously discussed nationally yet, but don’t take comfort in that. All major societal changes start small, and can occur quickly when people start to realize it’s possible. Remember how quickly gay marriage went from inconceivable to generally accepted law?
Meanwhile, you propose banning doors.
Who have you seen or heard claiming that? There are a *lot *of things we can do short of that, things the growing momentum of whose enactment would enable the removal of the primary obstacle. Some you’ve mentioned yourself, even.
What about flooding schools with even more guns in the hands of untrained teachers?
Then what would you do if you did get rid of the 2nd?
Yes. And murders.
But even after we do get rid of all guns, there still will be school mass killings and murders. But maybe less.
That would be nice, what do you suggest? I suggest reaching out to troubled kids.
Because Congress doesnt want to over-ride the states, and really, it’s not a problem. Yes, in some states you can buy a gun from a 'eyes determinately shut" seller without a background check, but so far, none have been used in school shootings and not many are used in crimes.
I said the ban the SALE of such magazines, not *possession.
*
Well, it is sometimes bruited about but the 2nd Ad is not in any way a LEGAL wall vs reasonable gun laws, SCOTUS even said so.
But if you can’t get Congress to pass reasonable gun laws within the purview of the 2nd, what makes you think that will get rid of the 2nd Ad? But of course **Scumpup **is right.
The exact same thing can be said about the 1st Ad.
Yep. It wont be repealed in our lifetimes, if ever.
But common sense gun control laws can be passed.
The proposition I heard was to give them free training and take away any rules prohibiting them from being armed. In other words, teachers could be armed if they so wished, and training would be offered.
Free speech rights go back to the Magna Carta at least. Try again.
Is there any so-called “common sense” gun law that, say, California (for example), has not been able to pass because the 2nd amendment exists? Anybody know of one? Or are we strictly talking about federal law here?
Again, where are you getting that from?
Fewer people getting killed would be an improvement, yes. Glad we agree on something, however basic and obvious. Can we build on that now?
Sure, there would be less deaths of we got rid of all guns. How do you suggest that happening?
Well SCOTUS did strike down DC’s very restrictive gun laws and also Chicago’s.
DCs= "handgun ban and requirement that lawfully-owned rifles and shotguns be kept “unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock” .
Chicago “Chicago’s requirement that all firearms in the city be registered, yet refusing all handgun registrations after 1982 when a citywide handgun ban was passed”.
I dont call either "common sense’ but others may disagree.
So far, all of CA’s gun laws- some of which are very silly- have been allowed to continue.
The Bill of Rights 1689 , allowed Protestant citizens of England to “have Arms for their Defence suitable to their Conditions and as allowed by Law”.
Try again.
Actually, no the Magna Carta did no such thing, it was the The Bill of Rights 1689 , the same Bill that gave the right to bear arms.
If that were to happen (which it won’t in my lifetime), and I was in charge, I would ban all automatic and semi-automatic weapons.
But I would not ban all guns.
Do you see a difference?
Schools can’t comment publicly on confidential information. Maybe that’s why people assume schools don’t “reach out.” Teachers are trained to spot red flags. Usually this means not only reaching out to the student, but to his parent(s), too, as well as a referral to a school counselor and/or administrator. We simply don’t and can’t know how many school shootings have been averted this way.
But not all potential school shooters are waving red flags. Some, in fact, are careful not to do so. Some red flags are, in fact, only red in retrospect.
For red flag kids, adults reaching out is not always sufficient. A school can recommend therapy; it can’t force the parents to agree or follow through. A school can notify law enforcement and DFS; it can’t force them to act. Cops can advise parents to keep guns locked and out of the hands of the kid. (And yes, this is possible.) They can’t force parents to do so.
I get it. It’d be so easy if “reaching out” were sufficient. It’s not. School shootings have multiple causes and need multiple solutions.
Sure. You do know that automatic guns are more or less banned now, right?
And it might be within the purview of the 2nd to ban semi-autos.
Mind you, you can fire a lever action or bolt action rifle really fast, so obviously they would have to be next, right?
And why is that? Protected by the Constitution?
Of course it isn’t 100%. But it can and should be done and would reduce such shootings.