The more we learn about the unthinkable events in Uvalde, like what happened in Sandy Hook, the more we realize we’re avoiding the simple things to focus on the wrong things.
In addition to the locks, let me add that every classroom should have cameras with live feeds installed. Part of the failure at Uvalde was that the cops didn't seem to have much idea what the situation was behind the locked fourth grade classroom door. Additional intelligence may have altered their decision making in a way that may have saved a few more kids' lives.
I've worked where psychiatric exams are required prior to employment. I know a couple of readers will question how I got the job. It did reduce aberrant behavior in the workplace. I have also been responsible for securing military and industrial facilities. It can be done but the option for lethal force has to be on the table.
I believe we will have to spend the money to vet gun purchasers more thoroughly. Hardening schools will also be required. There are either more crazies out there than there once were, or societal factors have changed so that crazies are more inspired to act. Like a lot of people my age, I remember shotguns and rifles in gun racks in the high school parking lot. Justice Scalia said he rode the subway with a long gun. Incidents were rare.
I really believe focusing on the point of purchase, not manufactures or individuals per se, is the best path. Having the psych option with qualified people is a good start.
As for schools, I get some are a collection of double wides and separate buildings with walkways (especially in Florida). But there are ways to secure each building. Yes, fences if nothing else. We can’t have this happen. Taking every rifle and pistol away is not feasible in the US, nor is it a long term desirable goal in our large diverse culture. It would certainly end in tyranny. A terrible legacy for our kids. However we can make our guns safer.
I'm all for better security around schools. But that's not enough anymore than Nancy Reagan just telling us to say no to drugs. There's got to be more. BTW, i don't want your guns, i want better enforcement, more realistic controls on who is buying and who is selling. That's an easy fix. But wait, we can't agree to even go there because the NRA won't let us.
Therein is the heart of the problem. The NRA is a scum sucking organization that lives large off of donations from the suckers who think they give two shits about your owning a gun. One of the best reads of the day was when Charlie Sykes posted former President George Bush's letter to the NRA dropping out of the organization. Even back then he understood the problem.
The worst part is, the legislation was in place following Reagan being shot. It took several years (1994) with the support of the Brady Bill from both parties. It was common sense legislation that unfortunately had a sunset provision in 2004. One can only imagine where we would be today if that bill had still been in place.
Again, nothing wrong with trying to make schools safer, but until we get past the idea that more guns are the answer, we'll keep burying American's in record numbers. And one final shout out to all those brave American politicians scheduled to speak at the NRA's gun show this weekend. Just a scant distance away from the tragedy and yet there they go, insuring they get their yearly stipend from the gun manufacturers who are selling more guns than ever. Shameful. Freaking shameful.
This could plausibly work on a school with one large building, and no windows: what good does this do on an open-campus design with windows? My K-12 took place in such environments: my elementary school now has a high metal fence and security doors, but if someone really wanted to get in they could. As far as I know my middle and high schools are still open campuses, with multiple buildings - sort of like a junior college.
What does a single entry mean for fire safety, or from it being used as a choke-point?
How will the need to use the bathroom work: will every classroom now need a toilet and sink?
Turning schools into fortresses or prisons screams the opposite of freedom.
And again to note: the "law abiding citizens" line ignores that all sorts of things are banned for law abiding citizens to own/purchase after someone abuses them. We absolutely could ban the sale of such weapons going forward, and even require mandatory gun buy backs if we really wanted to do so.
I don't want to go too in-depth into other changes I'd like to see, like:
Universal background checks and psych evals for purchase/possession
Licensing requirements for purchase and possession
Classify firearms into different categories with different requirements for licensing for each (e.g. "tools" like shotguns and hunting rifles, "defense" for handguns and AR-style weapons, etc...)
Close loopholes: require private gun sales/transfers be performed at FFLs (h/t to you)
Require electronic record keeping for FFLs (h/t to you)
All guns are deadly. A shotgun is just as deadly as a rifle. A “hunting rifle” like a .306 is far more powerful than an AR-15 (which can be used for hunting too). Psych evals, fine but having an arbitrary license requirement for possession of most guns is a 2A violation. I am all for having sales people trained in red flag signs and having further conversation required when seen.
There's also something that might be productively imported from the finance world in addition to looking for red flags, Know Your Client:
"The Know Your Client (KYC) rule is an ethical requirement for those in the securities industry who are dealing with customers during the opening and maintaining of accounts. There are two rules which were implemented in July 2012 that cover this topic together: Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Rule 2090 (Know Your Customer) and FINRA Rule 2111 (Suitability). These rules are in place to protect both the broker-dealer and the customer and so that brokers and firms deal fairly with clients."
"The Know Your Customer Rule 2090 essentially states that every broker-dealer should use reasonable effort when opening and maintaining client accounts. It is a requirement to know and keep records on the essential facts of each customer, as well as identify each person who has authority to act on the customer’s behalf."
"The KYC rule is important at the beginning of a customer-broker relationship to establish the essential facts of each customer before any recommendations are made. The essential facts are those required to service the customer’s account effectively and to be aware of any special handling instructions for the account. Also, the broker-dealer needs to be familiar with each person who has the authority to act on behalf of the customer and needs to comply with all the laws, regulations, and rules of the securities industry."[1]
I can see extending the same principles and ideas that discourage banks from doing business with likely criminals applying in the realm of gun sales. You do this by making the person/shop that sold a gun used in the commission of a crime subject to some penalty for being the source of the weapon (with expiration clauses, so that if someone commits a crime 5 years AFTER purchase, the shop is no longer on the hook). It adds an additional risk calculation on the part of gun sellers which results in more scrutiny into who they are selling weapons to.
So? A shotgun or bolt-action can only fire so fast: basing the regulation on RPS makes some sense, no? Or a combination of RPS and caliber of the round, for example.
What exactly would be arbitrary about licensing? If getting something like a Ruger 10/22 or a shotgun license involves passing the background check, psych eval, and gun safety training - is that really a problem?
As we've discussed previously, reasonable regulation is legal and not a violation of the 2A. Rather than just shoot down licensing/categorization, offer some thoughts on how to make it work within the context of current law: it's doable.
Proper gun handling and safety training would be a good thing. Increasing the minimum age for purchase of a gun might also help in that it would give an additional three years for juvenile time bombs to explode in some fashion that might not involve a firearm. I would make exceptions for those 18 and over who have six months or more honorable military service.
The 5.56mm round "tumbles" on impact, inflicting greater damage/wounds than other rounds may do. Perhaps regulating what types of ammo are readily available without licensing is another item to look at.
Like any conservative, I'm sure the govt is capable of building, installing and maintaining all these man traps around schools. Shouldn't be any mishaps at all. Or maybe a few? But I'm sure child deaths resulting from mantrap malfunctions will be ... like... less than 1000 maybe.
And the children who are killed or maim will be the least fit to survive. The dummies and what not. Proof that evolution is true... hold on...
Maybe the US should just abort all new borns.- Look problem solved (and in less than 500 words)
Your arguments are in bad faith. Nobody will die from having these systems. How many die in banks or military bases? It’s not new technology. How many kids close garage doors on themselves? See, there’s sensors that stop doors from crushing people. But having an outside locked door with a technical system enforcing it is 90% of the battle. And a good number of more wealthy school districts have those systems. Why not make it standard for all schools?
No more guns, no more gun deaths. It's not hard, all it takes is the fortitude to go get them. And you don't even have to go get them. Offer a generous buy back and mandatory life in prison if your registered firearm is used in a murder. Those law abiding citizens could keep them and nobody would ever know.
It’s an intellectually dishonest answer. It’s not possible so why spend time arguing over it? The Second Amendment will not be repealed. People won’t give up all their guns and the U.S. does not have the capability of taking all guns from everyone. So let’s stop with the BS and talk about doable things.
The only one being dishonest here is you. It is possible to repeal amendments. So your statement is a lie. So now you have to move to the fact that gun owners think a few hundred kids massacred a year is an acceptable trade off for their love of guns. And the idea that this country couldn't actually get the guns is absurd as well. In fact, not much you say is actually fact.
Yeah my plan is not to worry about it. You offer a generous buyback and then you prevent any new purchases. Those "law abiding" gun owners can hold on to their preciouses for the rest of their lives. And if one of them is used in a crime then you charge that person with mandatory life sentences.
Do you have any idea how many non registered firearms there are in America? I look at gun registration as being fairly recent. I remember when you could buy them at a garage sale. Men have been passing them down to their sons for generations and I might add semi-autos (which is all these guns) are have been around for more than a century.
I live in the west and unregistered gun ownership is very very common. People have gun safes full of them. Gun confiscation is never going to happen. It isn't realistic.
There is no such thing as a “registered gun.” There is ATF Form 4473 which records a firearm transaction but that’s not going to tell you who has what guns at any given time. In Georgia it’s illegal to keep such records. In any case, you’re correct, gun confiscation in the USA is a fantasy advanced by politicians who make money selling it.
I understand the magnitude of that statement. I know how many guns are here. But if most gun owners are responsible then those in circulation now are less important than those which have yet to be bought. In the mean time you take the next 10 years to get as many off the streets as you can. In 10 years we should join the rest of the civilized world with very little gun death and no mass shootings. This isn't an unsolvable problem its that most americans have no desire to actually solve it. I just wish people were upfront about it.
Most gun owners are completely okay with these child deaths if its what the cost is for them to keep their weapons. I'm sick of the lies.
Which of his arguments are bullcrap? They seem very legitimate to me. I also think the anti-gun folks have legitimate arguments. Like most things in life, the solution to this isn't 100% black or white. It's going to take people working together and compromising to find the best ways to keep kids safe. Unfortunately, given the current political climate I don't see that happening any time soon. Doesn't mean we shouldn't push for it though.
The idea that turning every school in America into a version of the Raft from the Avengers movies as a way to avoid dealing with guns is beyond stupid. The idea that we shouldn't discuss gun control because a good portion of this country loves guns more than children is crap. At some point the gun fetish this country has is going to lose its grip. And we should keep talking about it until it does. The only question is how many children the right will sacrifice until they put it on the table.
Steve was right when he said he would give up his guns. And while he may have changed his mind since the sides have started bickering against each other again the fact is somewhere down the line something horrible enough will happen for America to wake up. it will probably take an actual assault from a nationalist militia but that could happen any day now. What will these gun freaks say when the body count is in the thousands?
In addition to the locks, let me add that every classroom should have cameras with live feeds installed. Part of the failure at Uvalde was that the cops didn't seem to have much idea what the situation was behind the locked fourth grade classroom door. Additional intelligence may have altered their decision making in a way that may have saved a few more kids' lives.
As noted by Tim Miller in https://www.thebulwark.com/in-uvalde-the-most-enraging-press-conference-in-american-history/:
Parkland had an armed officer and a single point of entry. Didn't help.
Sandy Hook was breached by the killer firing through a window next to a locked security door.
Santa Fe High School had a school shooting plan and armed officers in place. 10 were killed.
We will never have perfect cops, or unimpeachable protocols, and "more competent" good guys with guns. We HAVE to make it harder to get these weapons.
I've worked where psychiatric exams are required prior to employment. I know a couple of readers will question how I got the job. It did reduce aberrant behavior in the workplace. I have also been responsible for securing military and industrial facilities. It can be done but the option for lethal force has to be on the table.
I believe we will have to spend the money to vet gun purchasers more thoroughly. Hardening schools will also be required. There are either more crazies out there than there once were, or societal factors have changed so that crazies are more inspired to act. Like a lot of people my age, I remember shotguns and rifles in gun racks in the high school parking lot. Justice Scalia said he rode the subway with a long gun. Incidents were rare.
I really believe focusing on the point of purchase, not manufactures or individuals per se, is the best path. Having the psych option with qualified people is a good start.
As for schools, I get some are a collection of double wides and separate buildings with walkways (especially in Florida). But there are ways to secure each building. Yes, fences if nothing else. We can’t have this happen. Taking every rifle and pistol away is not feasible in the US, nor is it a long term desirable goal in our large diverse culture. It would certainly end in tyranny. A terrible legacy for our kids. However we can make our guns safer.
Slippery slope fallacy.
I'm all for better security around schools. But that's not enough anymore than Nancy Reagan just telling us to say no to drugs. There's got to be more. BTW, i don't want your guns, i want better enforcement, more realistic controls on who is buying and who is selling. That's an easy fix. But wait, we can't agree to even go there because the NRA won't let us.
Therein is the heart of the problem. The NRA is a scum sucking organization that lives large off of donations from the suckers who think they give two shits about your owning a gun. One of the best reads of the day was when Charlie Sykes posted former President George Bush's letter to the NRA dropping out of the organization. Even back then he understood the problem.
The worst part is, the legislation was in place following Reagan being shot. It took several years (1994) with the support of the Brady Bill from both parties. It was common sense legislation that unfortunately had a sunset provision in 2004. One can only imagine where we would be today if that bill had still been in place.
Again, nothing wrong with trying to make schools safer, but until we get past the idea that more guns are the answer, we'll keep burying American's in record numbers. And one final shout out to all those brave American politicians scheduled to speak at the NRA's gun show this weekend. Just a scant distance away from the tragedy and yet there they go, insuring they get their yearly stipend from the gun manufacturers who are selling more guns than ever. Shameful. Freaking shameful.
This could plausibly work on a school with one large building, and no windows: what good does this do on an open-campus design with windows? My K-12 took place in such environments: my elementary school now has a high metal fence and security doors, but if someone really wanted to get in they could. As far as I know my middle and high schools are still open campuses, with multiple buildings - sort of like a junior college.
What does a single entry mean for fire safety, or from it being used as a choke-point?
How will the need to use the bathroom work: will every classroom now need a toilet and sink?
Turning schools into fortresses or prisons screams the opposite of freedom.
And again to note: the "law abiding citizens" line ignores that all sorts of things are banned for law abiding citizens to own/purchase after someone abuses them. We absolutely could ban the sale of such weapons going forward, and even require mandatory gun buy backs if we really wanted to do so.
I don't want to go too in-depth into other changes I'd like to see, like:
Universal background checks and psych evals for purchase/possession
Licensing requirements for purchase and possession
Classify firearms into different categories with different requirements for licensing for each (e.g. "tools" like shotguns and hunting rifles, "defense" for handguns and AR-style weapons, etc...)
Close loopholes: require private gun sales/transfers be performed at FFLs (h/t to you)
Require electronic record keeping for FFLs (h/t to you)
Owner liability laws
All guns are deadly. A shotgun is just as deadly as a rifle. A “hunting rifle” like a .306 is far more powerful than an AR-15 (which can be used for hunting too). Psych evals, fine but having an arbitrary license requirement for possession of most guns is a 2A violation. I am all for having sales people trained in red flag signs and having further conversation required when seen.
There's also something that might be productively imported from the finance world in addition to looking for red flags, Know Your Client:
"The Know Your Client (KYC) rule is an ethical requirement for those in the securities industry who are dealing with customers during the opening and maintaining of accounts. There are two rules which were implemented in July 2012 that cover this topic together: Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Rule 2090 (Know Your Customer) and FINRA Rule 2111 (Suitability). These rules are in place to protect both the broker-dealer and the customer and so that brokers and firms deal fairly with clients."
"The Know Your Customer Rule 2090 essentially states that every broker-dealer should use reasonable effort when opening and maintaining client accounts. It is a requirement to know and keep records on the essential facts of each customer, as well as identify each person who has authority to act on the customer’s behalf."
"The KYC rule is important at the beginning of a customer-broker relationship to establish the essential facts of each customer before any recommendations are made. The essential facts are those required to service the customer’s account effectively and to be aware of any special handling instructions for the account. Also, the broker-dealer needs to be familiar with each person who has the authority to act on behalf of the customer and needs to comply with all the laws, regulations, and rules of the securities industry."[1]
I can see extending the same principles and ideas that discourage banks from doing business with likely criminals applying in the realm of gun sales. You do this by making the person/shop that sold a gun used in the commission of a crime subject to some penalty for being the source of the weapon (with expiration clauses, so that if someone commits a crime 5 years AFTER purchase, the shop is no longer on the hook). It adds an additional risk calculation on the part of gun sellers which results in more scrutiny into who they are selling weapons to.
[1] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/k/knowyourclient.asp
So? A shotgun or bolt-action can only fire so fast: basing the regulation on RPS makes some sense, no? Or a combination of RPS and caliber of the round, for example.
What exactly would be arbitrary about licensing? If getting something like a Ruger 10/22 or a shotgun license involves passing the background check, psych eval, and gun safety training - is that really a problem?
As we've discussed previously, reasonable regulation is legal and not a violation of the 2A. Rather than just shoot down licensing/categorization, offer some thoughts on how to make it work within the context of current law: it's doable.
Proper gun handling and safety training would be a good thing. Increasing the minimum age for purchase of a gun might also help in that it would give an additional three years for juvenile time bombs to explode in some fashion that might not involve a firearm. I would make exceptions for those 18 and over who have six months or more honorable military service.
Also:
The 5.56mm round "tumbles" on impact, inflicting greater damage/wounds than other rounds may do. Perhaps regulating what types of ammo are readily available without licensing is another item to look at.
Most, if not all, jacketed ammo will do the same. Expanding ammo is better for self-defense and is less likely to pass through the target.
Like any conservative, I'm sure the govt is capable of building, installing and maintaining all these man traps around schools. Shouldn't be any mishaps at all. Or maybe a few? But I'm sure child deaths resulting from mantrap malfunctions will be ... like... less than 1000 maybe.
And the children who are killed or maim will be the least fit to survive. The dummies and what not. Proof that evolution is true... hold on...
Maybe the US should just abort all new borns.- Look problem solved (and in less than 500 words)
Your arguments are in bad faith. Nobody will die from having these systems. How many die in banks or military bases? It’s not new technology. How many kids close garage doors on themselves? See, there’s sensors that stop doors from crushing people. But having an outside locked door with a technical system enforcing it is 90% of the battle. And a good number of more wealthy school districts have those systems. Why not make it standard for all schools?
They are not made in bad faith. They're absurd. Just as building mantraps around schools is absurd.
So much bullcrap just to get around the fact that you won't give up your guns no matter how many kids are killed.
I already said I'd give up my guns. How are you going to deliver no more kids being killed? You just want my guns.
No more guns, no more gun deaths. It's not hard, all it takes is the fortitude to go get them. And you don't even have to go get them. Offer a generous buy back and mandatory life in prison if your registered firearm is used in a murder. Those law abiding citizens could keep them and nobody would ever know.
It’s an intellectually dishonest answer. It’s not possible so why spend time arguing over it? The Second Amendment will not be repealed. People won’t give up all their guns and the U.S. does not have the capability of taking all guns from everyone. So let’s stop with the BS and talk about doable things.
The only one being dishonest here is you. It is possible to repeal amendments. So your statement is a lie. So now you have to move to the fact that gun owners think a few hundred kids massacred a year is an acceptable trade off for their love of guns. And the idea that this country couldn't actually get the guns is absurd as well. In fact, not much you say is actually fact.
Ok. How are the feds going to get the guns when they don't even know where most of them are? I'm sure you must have a plan.
Yeah my plan is not to worry about it. You offer a generous buyback and then you prevent any new purchases. Those "law abiding" gun owners can hold on to their preciouses for the rest of their lives. And if one of them is used in a crime then you charge that person with mandatory life sentences.
Do you have any idea how many non registered firearms there are in America? I look at gun registration as being fairly recent. I remember when you could buy them at a garage sale. Men have been passing them down to their sons for generations and I might add semi-autos (which is all these guns) are have been around for more than a century.
I live in the west and unregistered gun ownership is very very common. People have gun safes full of them. Gun confiscation is never going to happen. It isn't realistic.
There is no such thing as a “registered gun.” There is ATF Form 4473 which records a firearm transaction but that’s not going to tell you who has what guns at any given time. In Georgia it’s illegal to keep such records. In any case, you’re correct, gun confiscation in the USA is a fantasy advanced by politicians who make money selling it.
You could also make the point that not knowing who has what is pretty bad in its own: no record of private transaction or gift.
If we're to have owner liability laws, then logically we need to know who owns what.
I understand the magnitude of that statement. I know how many guns are here. But if most gun owners are responsible then those in circulation now are less important than those which have yet to be bought. In the mean time you take the next 10 years to get as many off the streets as you can. In 10 years we should join the rest of the civilized world with very little gun death and no mass shootings. This isn't an unsolvable problem its that most americans have no desire to actually solve it. I just wish people were upfront about it.
Most gun owners are completely okay with these child deaths if its what the cost is for them to keep their weapons. I'm sick of the lies.
Confiscating every gun in the US -legal and illegal - is not a realistic proposal.
Why not? Are you saying it couldn't be done or just that we don't want to do it? If America really decided to get the guns they could do it.
Which of his arguments are bullcrap? They seem very legitimate to me. I also think the anti-gun folks have legitimate arguments. Like most things in life, the solution to this isn't 100% black or white. It's going to take people working together and compromising to find the best ways to keep kids safe. Unfortunately, given the current political climate I don't see that happening any time soon. Doesn't mean we shouldn't push for it though.
The idea that turning every school in America into a version of the Raft from the Avengers movies as a way to avoid dealing with guns is beyond stupid. The idea that we shouldn't discuss gun control because a good portion of this country loves guns more than children is crap. At some point the gun fetish this country has is going to lose its grip. And we should keep talking about it until it does. The only question is how many children the right will sacrifice until they put it on the table.
Steve was right when he said he would give up his guns. And while he may have changed his mind since the sides have started bickering against each other again the fact is somewhere down the line something horrible enough will happen for America to wake up. it will probably take an actual assault from a nationalist militia but that could happen any day now. What will these gun freaks say when the body count is in the thousands?