On NPR news they just said “…and the only obvious difference between us and these other countries is” our loose gun laws. Oh, except that we invented the drug-them-all-for-profit mental health system, that our congress is corrupted by campaign finance bribery and gerrymandering, and, oh yeah, we are so stupid that our public radio radio cannot understand a simple explanation, and oh, 4th, we blame and spy on, demonize, assault and threaten to drug anyone who is not also this stupid and tries to pint out, for example, that antidepressants are rather obviously involved, or at least worth considering as a cause. Again, the two problems coincide, and public shooting began at the same time that psychopharmacology and the prescription drug industry took over the practice of the “mental health professionals.” This is precisely what we are doing that other countries are not doing, and why things like Orlando and Sandy Hook keep happening. Other nations do not worship profit, subjecting education, psychology and law enforcement and the courts to money, and other nations are not so slavishly subject to popular opinion. And perhaps other nations do not only consider problems when there is blood all over, but listen to intelligence and foresight when people make basic, communicable suggestions.
The right to bear arms has an obvious limit, and there is no reason not to license guns as we do cars, except that we are too stupid to do this correctly. We would have B. A. sociology students judging Clint Eastwood, who would surely be smart enough not to say anything the shrinks do not understand. Everyone can drive a lethal car, and licences are lost due to irrresponsibilities, but it is not clear that guns should be licenced like this. The States can surely license guns as they do cars, since the Second Amendment was never yet selectively incorporated (or, applied to the states as well as to the federal government through the fourteenth Amendment, which applies the liberty of the Fifth Amendment to the states). Again, the CLC policy is to drive a wedge between responsible and irresponsible gun sales and ownership, in every way possible, so that the end result is that responsible but vulnerable people have guns for protection but criminals and irresponsible people do not have guns, even for protection. The difference between a machine gun and a hand gun is about 7 dead compared to 49 dead. We do not allow private ownership of tanks and nukes, and there are some simple but severe weapons that, when we are under attack, as we are, the police may not allow one to own.
And why do we not go straight after these shooters, but give them three hours? Why do the people themselves not attack them, even by throwing things, at an opportune moment, all at once? Perhaps because we rely on guns, which are often useless in the clutch, or worse than useless. And our education is again too stupid and subject to stupid common opinion to cultivate a training for how to act in such a circumstance.
We do not understand our own Second Amendment, which is very difficult due to intentionally vague language, as has been said too by a constitutional scholar, though I have misplaced the name.
The right of the people to keep and bear arms will not be infringed because of the necessity of a well regulated militia to the security of a free state. If the people have their own guns, they will know how to use them, and the militia will be better regulated. When we bear arms, it is in service to the governor, especially when we assemble armed. This is because military power is subject to the civilian, elected leaders. But it does not quite say that we have to be in the militia to bear arms, but that the right of the people to keep and carry arms will not be infringed. It seems that the right is preserved where carrying a machine gun is forbidden, because the person might carry a long gun. But where the bad guys have machine guns, it would be legal to carry a machine gun, theoretically. And of course there is a right of self defense and the defense of others, and though this is not in the Bill of Rights, it would be recognized by combining liberty of the Fifth Amendment with the Second Amendment. This liberty is very difficult. Unlike other nations, too, we are failing at it, in part because we are so stupid.