A few thoughts. I'm not for outright bans and collecting. For example the last DOJ prison statistics showed 2400 undocumented immigrants incarcerated for murder or manslaughter in California alone. I'm not with the crowd of throw anyone protecting sanctuary cities in jail and build a wall, even if most are responsible.
That goes both ways though.
I am for MUCH more stringent gun laws, and mental health screenings of gun owners.
I am for finding out socio-economic issues. When Australia put in their gun laws, their crime dropped quite a bit. New Zealand in the same socio-economic zone made no changes at all to their gun laws and crime dropped the SAME EXACT AMOUNT. What else happened there then?
I'm not for the "assault weapon" ban. Almost every major shooting is done indoors and within 25' And that's where a pistol (which contributes to over 80% of gun murders but is mostly used inner city, more minorities and that's not a focus here) is best. Easier to handle, maneuver, reload, conceal, and fire. Just the AR is a "sexier" weapon (thanks hollywood), so it becomes the go to, even if it's not the deadliest choice in these attacks.
Plus FBI data shows falling out of bed is more likely to kill you than an AR. Texting behind the wheel gets a $25 fine in my state and will kill about 5000 more people than shooting at people with an AR. But the AR is scary and when it's used it's front page, and even though it falls well behind pistols and shotguns as a murder weapon, it's looks will earn it a ban, and 20 years later when we are looking at the data, we will wonder AGAIN why it failed to impact murder rates in the US after putting all this money and effort there. I'm more data based than fear-mongering what people on Fox and CNN shout at me based.
Finally, I don't feel great about armed guards at all schools. You make the school a hard target, that student is finding them at the movies, or at the bowling alley, or at the birthday party. Then we get politicians saying "look it worked in schools" and next thing we have a law where anytime you can expect more than 30 people to congregate in one area, you need to hire an armed security guard.
As a temporary solution till we solve the soci-economic issues, sure. But my biggest worry is when has the Gov't ever put something in place temporarily and then let it expire or removed it?
If we can take those wayyyyy out on the right saying "don't change anything" and those wayyyyyy out on the left saying "ban it all" out of the conversation and let people that don't want to focus on the politics of it, but a solution, I think that's the best bet.
Just some thoughts. Probably piss off a lot on both sides, but I'm not really here to take a side because of an R or a D after someones name.