On Gun Laws and Tragedy

I have some notes for any anti-gun individuals who might read this post, and a couple for the people on my side.

For the Anti-gun folks:

1. Police were called to the Parkland shooter's (I refuse to learn the names of these assholes) home MULTIPLE times. As in 39. He posted credible threats on the internet UNDER HIS OWN NAME. People called the FBI twice about him. The armed school resource officer, rather than do his job, decided to sit the shooting out. For all intents and purposes, Law Enforcement at every level failed to do their jobs. These are the same people who'd be enforcing any new gun laws that get passed. What makes you think that they're competent do do that?
2. If you read the Second Amendment, the operative clause says, "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." There's a distinct lack of "unless it'll make people safer" or "unless it saves one child."
3. Even if the Second Amendment did allow for that, the problem isn't guns. Here are some data points:
1. 19 dead in a knife attack in Japan
2. 33 Dead in a mass stabbing at a Chinese train station
3. 22 stabbed outside a school (according to this article, knife attacks are apparently not uncommon in China)
4. 334 dead in the Beslan School Siege
5. 87 Dead in Happy Land arson
6. 168 dead in the Oklahoma City Bombing.
7.   
   
8.  If guns were the problem, our murder rate would make Honduras' look like kindergarten play. In fact, if there is a correlation between guns and homicide, it's a negative one.
9. If you refuse to accept Honduras' homicide rate as relevant, you're admitting that it's more complicated than "Guns cause crime".
4. Bump stocks aren't the problem either. They've been used once for a mass killing - mass killings are more likely to involve arson, explosives or trucks, than they are to involve a bump-fire stock. And yet people are getting all worked up about a piece of plastic that any chump with a 3d printer (and, if you're willing to do the assembly yourself, 3d printers are surprisingly affordable) can push out by the dozens or hundreds, depending on how committed he is. And you don't actually need a bump-fire stock to bump fire - it just makes it more comfortable.
5. Do you really want to give Trump more power?
6. Luty, Metral, Sten, Uru. Do you know what all those names have in common? They're all submachine guns that can be built with minimal tools and hardware store components. The Luty SMG was actually designed with that in mind. Variants of all those guns (except, AFAIK, the Luty) get mass produced by illegal arms factories in various nations and sold to criminals. most of these nations have very strict gun control. 
7. Gun control is not the answer, not even a part of it. There is, in fact, no simple answer. Allowing qualified teachers to carry, and putting armed LEOs in as many schools as possible is a start, but it isn't a complete answer in and of itself.

For my side:

1. Specifically for those who voted Trump in the primaries: now that Trump is advocating a useless ban on bump-fire stocks and raising the buying age of guns to 21, do you feel stupid? I hope you do. Just because someone says they're on your side doesn't mean that they actually are.
   EDIT: I'm not blaming anyone for voting for Trump in the General Election. Maximilien Robespierre is a more attractive choice than Hillary.
2. For the NRA - You quisling fuckweasels. I hope you're happy with yourselves for proposing a ban on a piece of plastic. The president apparently agrees with you.

Gun Control and Orlando

I'm a bit late to this - as part of my job, I'm often without internet for days to weeks - but since the "debate" is still going on, I'm going to put my two cents in.

1. If you say anything about a magazine limit, you're either stupid or ignorant. The man killed 49 people and wounded 53 more. Even if he only used one round per person, that means that he had to reload multiple times, during which times he was not shooting. Magazine limits just mean that he has to reload more often. Given that even inexperienced shooters can change a magazine in seconds, this doesn't really give a tactical advantage to anyone, except the shooter, because it reduces the ability of concealed carriers to carry ammunition covertly.
2. The same thing goes for banning removable magazines. Before removable magazines became popular, stripper clips enabled easy reloading. There are disadvantages to stripper clips (which is why removable magazines replaced them), but don't think for a second that someone couldn't take an SKS (with a 10 round fixed magazine), and a bunch of stripper clips and produce similar levels of carnage.
3. Assault Weapons Ban.  I've already covered, in detail, why an AWB is stupid and counterproductive. We're not going to get another one.
4. If these assholes were smart (which, fortunately for us, they aren't) they'd stop trying to shoot places up, and instead use fertilizer bombs. The Oklahoma City Bombing had more than 3 times as many dead, and more than 12 times as many wounded. Shootings can (and have) been stopped by ordinary citizens with guns. A bombing doesn't take that chance.
5. Stop using the word "Compromise". Compromise implies a give and take. Anti-Gun "compromises" so far have offered nothing in return to gun owners. If you offer me universal background checks, I'll tell you to go fuck yourself. If you offer me universal background checks, in return for which, you'll repeal the Firearm Owners Protection Act and the Gun Control Act of 1986, I might consider it.
6. Stop acting like you can actually control guns. Outside of the US, criminal arsenals (i.e. gun factories) and individuals make guns, ranging from "You couldn't get me to shoot that for a million bucks" to "professional quality sub-machine guns". Inside of the US, hobbyists (and criminals) make guns with the same range of quality - although the hobbyists tend to avoid making sub-machine guns, if only to avoid a felony conviction.

If you're willing to agree on those points, we might have a constructive conversation and figure out something that actually has a chance of working - since it probably won't involve trying to keep track of well over 300 million guns. Otherwise, we'll get stuck in the loop, where people like me explain why gun control won't work, and anti-gunners try to sell us their load of bull.

No, You don't Need a Factory To make Firearms

I've said it before and I'll say it again: The original AR-15 design is 58 years old (it's precursor design, the AR-10 is 60), the original AK design is 68 years old. The 1911, one of the definitive semi-auto pistol designs, dates from, you guessed it, 1911, with precursor designs and prototypes from the late 1890s. Machine guns predate the 20th century, and rapid fire crank weapons predate the American Civil War. Sniper rifles with effective ranges in excess of 800 yards were used to great effect in the aforementioned American Civil War, and current top-line sniper rifles are generally bolt action, which predates smokeless powder and metallic cartridges. Since all of these inventions, manufacturing technology has done nothing but improve. Basic machine tools, available to everyone, can be used to produce professional quality firearms. New developments, such as desktop CNC mills and 3-d printers simply reduce the amount of space and skill required.

So it should come as now surprise when criminals circumvent the law with homemade firearms.