[XogGyux]

This country is a mess.

I also don't understand why there is resistance to just raising the age to buy a gun to 21 across the board. Brain science shows that the prefrontal cortex is underdeveloped even at age 18.

GUUUUUUUUUNNNNNS

[XogGyux]

You know those movies in which a tiny little bomb is implanted in the brain and/or neck that "will explode if you do this or don't do that"? we need one of those for people with AR-15 and then have the AR-15 GPS trigger the bomb if the shooter attempts to shoot the fucking thing outside of a shooting range.
Fokin animals.

[Rancid]

GUUUUUUUUUNNNNNS

Yea, as you know, I'm a gun owner. Back when I was more active with respect to going to the shooting range, I also would occasionally frequent some gun forums. Most people on those forms are of the mind set "no compromise no matter what". Completely unwilling to budge on even reasonable ideas. We see some of that in this thread in @Scamp. Hence, why we will continue to see no change even though it's something like 80%+ of America is in favor of more effective gun laws.

The two biggest changes that would help is:

- Massive gun ownership restrictions on people that commit domestic violence. Apparently this is linked to mass shooters.
- Raise the age for rifles to 21 given what we know about brain science.

Other basic things like restricting access to schools. No, I don't mean turn schools into fortresses, but you know... lock the fucking doors during school hours, have some cameras, and put in a buzz in system (my kid's school has all of that). Also taking red flags in kids more seriously.

[Crantag]

You do realize that you can never be more than a short distance from an elementary school if you are in the suburbs, right?

When I lived in Texas there was a local report of a guy getting arrested crossing across a school ground with a rifle. Didn't seem like he was trying to shoot up the place, just transporting the gun. But was a stupid idea to take a short cut across the school ground.

[Drlee]

The police like to dress like soldiers. They enjoy playing with assault weapons just like every GI-wannabee does.

But here is what cops do not understand that soldiers do. When you are a combat leader, whether a senior officer or fire team corporal you know this: That you may have to order your troops (often your friends) to storm a machine gun nest or other enemy held place where fire is coming and jeopardizing your mission or men. And give the order knowing that some or all of your men, and sometimes yourself as their leader may get killed in the process. If the law enforcement that arrived at the school would have been a platoon of my soldiers, we would not have stopped for a briefing, we would not have waited for reinforcements, we would not have had the union steward try to figure out if we were on overtime or if we had the proper mix of male and female officers. There would have been one command. Shooter in the school. We are going to kill him. Be careful of bystanders and follow me.

Police are not and will never be trained to deal with shit like this. We as citizens require far to much restraint from them to ever allow training for what really needs to be done. The answer does not lie in killing an active shooter although that should be a training point. The answer lies in stopping kids with guns, limiting the lethality of easily obtainable weapons..

To this end I would ban people under 21 from owning or possessing a firearm without an adult present. Background checks and a waiting period for all gun purchases. Ban all semi-automatic weapons entirely without a license. No magazines over 3 rounds.

Won't happen. The next little girl to take one in the stomach and writhe in agony, crying for her mother and dying is already born and probably playing with dolls as we speak. And we will forsake her. And there will be many like her. And it will be the spineless Republicans who are, once again, at blame.

[Rancid]

I would ban people under 21

This should be the easiest thing to achieve. We've already raised cigarettes, alcohol, and handguns to 21. WHy not rifles? Why is there so much resistance to even this simple thing?

[Godstud]

Only in USA is Starbucks a dangerous place.

[ness31]

It’s like a backpack but it’s a gun. So peculiar

[Godstud]

Maybe it's just an elaborate coin dispenser?

If he wanted to be really manly a fanny pack would be better than carrying a gun showing how wee your penis is.

[jimjam]

Greg Abbott still addressed the NRA by pre-recorded video, while visiting Uvalde and holding a press conference there.

He said: “We will bind up the wounds of the people of Uvalde and once again restore the lustre of a community known for its warmth, its friendship and its values.”

BLAH-BLAH-BLAH ................ Hey Abbott........... how much money have you accepted from the NRA?

Here's an idea for you. Do something down there in Macho Land that will hurt the profits of the death/gun industry while improving the safety little school children and people like me who don't need to have a few dozen guns laying around .......

Again .... BLAH-BLAH-BLAH:

NRA chief executive, Wayne LaPierre, said: “Every NRA member and I know every decent American is mourning right now 21 beautiful lives ruthlessly and indiscriminately extinguished by a criminal monster. We are with [Uvalde] and all of America in prayer.”

[jimjam]

Only in USA is Starbucks a dangerous place.

What a fucking MORON ^

[Drlee]

What a fucking MORON ^

Yes. And the easiest soft target in the world. Reach under your coat, pull out a revolver, shoot him in the face, and walk away. But people like him are too stupid to know that. They are frightened little schoolyard bullies. And he is a perfect example of why we should ban assault weapons in the hands of private citizens. So many are simply not intelligent enough to own them.

[jimjam]

Welcome to Texas kids ....... the guns and death state.

[XogGyux]

What a fucking MORON ^

You kidding me? There are legitimate reasons to go to a store wearing shorts and an AR 15 in your back.

[Pants-of-dog]

You can pay the walls off in 20 years, if necessary.

For all ten schools, 5 million.
Payback period: 20 years.
5m divided by 20 is 250k.

Security budget per year: 450,000.
You want to get rid of 55% of the security budget.

Correct me if I am wrong but the lifespan of a wall is at least 30 years, often over 100. It's not a crazy proposition.

I find it more likely to be passed than gun control.

It depends.

I quoted the absolute lowest price. Which suggests it would last the shortest amount of time and cost the most in maintenance.

While this is unfeasible for the school budget, it probably fits well within the police budget.

[wat0n]

For all ten schools, 5 million.
Payback period: 20 years.
5m divided by 20 is 250k.

Security budget per year: 450,000.
You want to get rid of 55% of the security budget.

Yes. In fact as long as the wall pays for itself during its lifespan then it's okay.

By the way, what percentage of the security budget corresponds to labor? Surely, walling the premises would make security require less labor.

It depends.

I quoted the absolute lowest price. Which suggests it would last the shortest amount of time and cost the most in maintenance.

While this is unfeasible for the school budget, it probably fits well within the police budget.

Well in the example above then it's 5m/30 years = ~$167k, so the necessary savings would need to amount to a bit less of 40% of the security budget.

I don't know, I'd think needing less cops and security guards around would be something that would make you happy

[Rancid]

Greg Abbott still addressed the NRA by pre-recorded video, while visiting Uvalde and holding a press conference there.

I've grown to really really hate my state's politicians since moving here.

[Drlee]

It appears they hate you too. They are trying everything in their power to keep people who look like you from voting.

[Tainari88]

I've grown to really really hate my state's politicians since moving here.

Do you mean you don't like Ted Cruz?

He argues against Trump but then kisses his ass when the man is in power. That is called a sellout. A liar. And a hypocrite. But that is who he is. Do you mean you don't like this two-faced snake from Texas? Be loyal to the two-faced snake...you Texan traitor you Rancid!

[Pants-of-dog]

Yes. In fact as long as the wall pays for itself during its lifespan then it's okay.

By the way, what percentage of the security budget corresponds to labor? Surely, walling the premises would make security require less labor.

The wall does not pay for itself, since losing that much security staff would result in another weakness to be exploited by an assailant. As the Chinese discovered, a wall is only as impregnable as the people staffing it.

Well in the example above then it's 5m/30 years = ~$167k, so the necessary savings would need to amount to a bit less of 40% of the security budget.

I don't know, I'd think needing less cops and security guards around would be something that would make you happy :?:

Again, you are not factoring in maintenance costs. And you are ignoring the fact that this is only one obstacle to stop one way of entering the grounds. This wall that costs more than twice the entire budget could be defeated by hitting it with a car, or leaning a ladder against it.