So rather than tackle the problem at its root, this is his solution so as not to upset the National Riflemens Association !
Unbelievable! How did this man become President

Before our fellow Americans wade into your post, I might add that your remarks are your own rather than general consensus and would not surprise me if they might take you to task over your remark., You might also want to take a look at your spelling of "idiots"

USA is am amazing country and the people are some of the most generous,warm hearted and caring people you could ever want to meet. The gun violence issue is only a small part of what makes USA, but it receives a lot of attention both domestically and overseas.

The NRA has a strangle hold on the US political system and has pursued a very successful strategy of opposing ANY gun regulation because of the fear it will lead to a "slippery slope" and the banning of guns.

The second amendment to the constitution says that the right to bear arms "shall not be infringed" and is vital to protect USA against a tyrannical government.This made perfect sense right after the revolutionary war against the british. 250 years later though it is a pretty weak argument.The idea that the general population could resist the US army is insane as is the idea that the US army would ever follow a political leader that wanted to install tyranny in USA.

The right to bear arms issue came to a head in 2008 when the US supreme court reviewed a decision by a lower court.The case involved the banning of handguns and the argument was that banning handguns represented a violation of the second amendment because it infringed the right to bear arms. The supreme court heard arguments for and against the ban .It all really hinged on what the exact wording of the second amendment.The Supreme court ruled that its interpretation of the second amendment allowed individuals to won firearms even if they were not part of a militia and "the people" in the amendment referred to private individuals.It is a fascinating case and I would encourage anyone wanting to know more about the USA and guns to read a summary of the case.The dissenting opinions by the supreme court justices that voted against are very compelling in my mind.

So once the right to bear arms was upheld the National Rifleman Association (NRA) began a campaign of making major contributions to politicians in return for protection of any legislative initiatives that limited gun ownership. This has been incredibly successful.The epitome of this was when Obama introduced a bill to make background checks before buying a gun mandatory after the Sandy Hook school shooting.Although polls suggested 98% of people wanted improved background checks the bill was defeated in congress because of the votes of politicans (in both political parties) that ignored the polls and voted to protect the wishes of the NRA.

Part of the problem with gun control is that different states have different rules for buying guns.Some states are very strict and others are incredible lax. Some of the critics of gun control say gun controls laws dont work because in some of the areas where gun laws are very strict there is a lot of gun violence.However, in those cases people can go to a neighboring state where gun laws are lax, buy a gun and then return to their strict gun law state so it makes a mockery of the strict gun control laws.

The assault weapon ban is a complex issue.There is considerable controversy with these.Technically an AR-15 is not an assault rifle because it cant be switched to fully automatic .It can be modified, but that is not legal.Having said that it has been used in over 50% of the last few mass shootings and it ability to rein down massive firepower in a short period of time makes it a formidable weapon in the hands of someone wanting to inflict mass casualty.I thin t if it were banned that ban would be challenged and may not be upheld by the supreme court.I see no reason why people need an AR-15 as a private citizen, but I thin k you could allow them if you add some restrictions and require training and more extensive background checks.

The gun lobby likes to say we just need to enforce the gun laws we have and there is no need for more regulation.One thing to remember is that in the majority of mass shootings that have occurred the guns were bought legally and there is no current legislation that would have prevented these men from obtaining the weapons and ammo they used.The gun lobby says they would just get the weapon illegaly.Thatds true, but in doing that they are breaking the law and if caught before the shooting they are prosecuted and by trying to get the guns illegaly there is a possibility they would get caught before the shooting.

Tackling mental illness is also been discussed.The reality is those with mental illness are actually statistically less likley to be involved in violence than the general population.Last year the President relaxed the laws preventing people with mental illness from buying a gun.But even if you ban people with mental illness for owning a gun in the past few shootings the men were not being treated for any kind of mental illness so they wouldnt have been disqualified from owning a gun.

Arming teachers is insane.Most teachers would refuse.Teachers are already underpaid and schools are underfunded.You can put a teacher in charge of your kids life.Its not their job.Even if you did they would require extensive training to deal with an active shooter.in USA SWAT teams undergo this kind of training.And lets not forget with school shootings the shooters have been children.Even harden law enforcement officers understandably have issues shooting children.In the panic of a shooting with children running everywhere you would need to be very well trained to be able to identify the shooter.In the last shooting the shooter actually left the school as part of the evacuation and was not identified by law enforcement until after he was off schools grounds.


Its a mess and there are no simple solutions.I think limiting donations to politicians to prevent the politicians being bought is a good idea.I think adding some restrictions to the more powerful guns is a good idea, but the first thing that needs to happen is for the pro and anti gun lobby to agree to talk with no preconditions.When children are dying there should be nothing that cant be discussed or considered.There is not one or two things that will stop mass shootings.We have to be willing to try things and maybe modify them if they dont work.Doing nothing but offering "thoughts and prayers" is no longer acceptable.It never should have been.


So it is easy to look at USA and guns and shake your head, but it is a complex issue.If you have any doubt that USA is a great country just look at the 17 year olds that were in an active shooting situation a few days ago and are now sitting down with the President and going after the incumbent politicians to do something.

Well there are already restrictions on what you can own.You cant own an automatic weapon.The vast majority of AR-15 owners in USA will never use them for anything but sport and they dont think their rights should be infringed.its not really the right to bear arms thats at issue here.There is ZERO chance that guns will be banned in USA.It will never happen.So then the argument depends on what you mean by "infringed".Does denying you an AR-15 infringe your rights? because you can still have other firearms.The second amendment was written when it took 2 minutes to reload your weapon so there was no need to legislate against rapid fire weapons because they didnt exist.

Any legislative challenge to the second amendment will end up in the Supreme court,which currently has a Republican majority (Republicans generally support the right to bear arms).If congress wanted to add a new amendment to the constitution it requires 2/3 of congress to approve it or 2/3 state legislatures to approve which will never happen.

its a shame because the idea the constitution is set is stone is obviously flawed-we already have 25 amendments to it.

The best case scenario is that there would be some additional pieces of legislation added to the existing laws.

All valid points to a very serious matter here; i'm not a gun proponent but banning these type of guns now is ' 'closing the barn door after all the horses ran away' == there are thousands of these guns out there and collectors will not willingly give them up to turn them in, even if they did are are many illegal ones out there in criminals hands so a weapons ban will not solve this issue-- it is hard to say what the right answer is. As a Connecticut resident the Newtown tragedy hit home, i wish this had an easy solution. If you have any extra funds please donate to the March of our Lives.

One month on and here we are again.

School shooting

Regards
delboy271155
(Derek)

I am currently on vacation in nyc. There are MAASIVE crowds here for the March for our lives protest.