Trump backs effort to improve gun background checks: White House

MAJ James Woods
Better more thorough or integrated background checks are not a silver bullet. The weapons from Sandy Hook were taken from the shooters mother after he murdered her, the Vegas guns were all legally bought as was Parkland. Columbine's weapons, I believe, were illegally purchased.

That is why you have to harden the targets. We have people that demonstrate they will murder women, school children, teachers etc. with no mercy. This began to change about the mid 1990's. We have to address this brutal reality. We can pretend we can stop shooters with technology but we are kidding ourselves. We have people with dark hearts that need to be stopped by people ready to do real violence on them to protect innocent life.

Cpl Jeff N. - Again, as you stated in one of your posts, the conversation should actually address the issues. Why are we talking about improving existing background checks if none of the suggested improvements would've stopped any of the examples I provided from happening?
As for hardening the targets, you mean armed security and staff, active and passive defenses at schools and other locations. That's not facing reality, that's avoiding the other options that goes against one's right to have any gun and accessory they want.
It's a harsh reality that armor piercing bullets exist and can be used against police yet doesn't stop the argument for it to be legal for consumer purchase. It's a harsh reality that rifles can be purchased same day in some states while there's a waiting period for hand guns so it's not surprising rifles are the firearms of choose in mass shootings. It's a harsh reality that family members and friends know someone with violent behavior and disturbing views on life but don't have the ability to prevent that person from acquiring a gun without being able to provide sufficient proof a crime is about to be committed.

How dare we should hope to be like other industrialized nations that do not have the amount of gun violence nor see the need to harden the targets.

MAJ James Woods - James, there is no one thing that will improve our outcomes. Background checks are one of many things to work on. Since 1998 there have been about 1 million denials on NICS checks. So 1 million fewer purchases, the vast majority were due to the applicant being a criminal of some sort (State, federal etc). So they do stop some legal purchases. Background checks will not address it all.

Effective security is always layered it doesn't really work well any other way. Schools need layered security which can have fences around perimeters, cameras in some areas, limited entry points to the school, metal detectors perhaps and even locker and car checks etc. and yes, even armed security. That can be teachers with permits that are comfortable doing so or armed/hired security or some combination.

How many armor piercing bullets are used in crimes? Almost none. That is a red herring. Rifles are not the "weapon of choice". Handguns are used in far more shootings that AR-15's or rifles in general (between 1982 and 2017). Your assumption that rifles are the issue is misplaces. It makes sense too, handguns are far easier to conceal and are better in close quarters than rifles. Most thing that Sandy Hook was done with an AR, it was not. The shooter used hand guns. He had a rifle in the car but did not use it. This was widely misreported by a media with an agenda.

We are not like most other countries in many ways. We have a bill of rights and a Constitution and a government beholden to the people. I have a number of things we can do to help reduce the shootings but the bottom line is in order to stop a shooter once started is with a gun. Most shootings are over in 5 minutes. The cops will not make it there for more than 5 minutes. You can ignore the reality of the depravity we have in this country but that will not change it. We have people willing to kill innocent school children, their teachers and anyone else that gets in their way.

Cpl Jeff N. - No kidding that there are no one thing that solves all outcomes; however, introducing a solution that doesn't address the problem is also wasting our time.
-Effective security is layered but we shouldn't feel that we need fences and walls, cameras and guards everywhere. That's a cop out defense to satisfy one's personal desire to have access to anything they want.
-Almost none? So the answer isn't zero. There is evidence that armor piercing bullets have been found at crime scenes but it's still okay to make them available to the public and the police just has to deal with it. Uh ok.
-Rifles aren't the weapon of choice? Tell us again what weapons has been used in mass shootings the last 10 years? 20 years? Not shootings that resulted in less than 5 deaths to include the shooter; actual mass casualty events. If you're going to generalize all gun related violence between '82-'17 to support your hand gun argument, you're using disinformation.
-Our Bill of Rights and Constitution makes us not like other countries? We're not the only democracy in the world. We're not the only country that guarantees rights for their citizens in those democracies. They have constitutions or declarations or articles or a different name that defines their democracy and rule of law and rights. Many of them allows the right to own a gun and have the same mental health and family issues. Yet somehow they have lower murder rates, lower incarceration rates, lower mass shooting rates; so yeah we're not like most other countries and it has nothing to do with our Bill of Rights and Constitution.
-"the bottom line is in order to stop a shooter once started is with a gun." No kidding. No one is saying you stop an active shooter with a knife, taser, or big stick. Now lets stop being reactive and start being proactive which means prevention which means telling some individuals they cannot own a gun because they have a documented history of violence that should be reportable.

What existing laws and what are straw purchasers? Honest question. RPers have taught me a lot about guns and ammo this week.

Here is one instance. https://www.snopes.com/dontray-mills/

Here is another one: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/gun-trafficking-law-maloney-kenneth-thompson/

It ; looks like he complied with the law on purchase and that there was no reason under current statues to bar that Purchase even if the FBI had interviewed him since his posts were not tactfully criminal just bug-nuts crazy. Crazy posts are not criminal just crazy, and crazy comes under the jurisdiction of county and state,

None of the current laws even if enforced perfectly would have made a difference

Florida social services had a shot, but they determined he was not a threat.

CPT Jack Durish thank you for the response. Those are excellent questions that need to be explored further. Unfortunately I don’t think that will happen in this polarized environment. But I do believe something has to change. What it is I don’t know.

CDR (Join to see) - Honesty. It's refreshing. We need more of it

Well, Jack, we do agree on one thing. Are we now responding to a process or are we responding to the hysteria of the moment?