It's not for citizens to form militias but the States and also that's the the purpose of the second amendment. It was meant to ensure government wasn't centralized at all. You are also wrong in that gun rights someohow are the only protections for democracy. Incorrect. There's checks and balances, three branches of government, and most important people have the right to vote.

You are also wrong in that a fundamental right cannot be regulated. If that were the case then there wouldn't be these BS voter ID laws. It's not that government is going to take away your guns, it's that they can and should be able to have tougher ID laws/procedures and stop exceptions to them, as well as making a national registry for all guns that are produced.

You act like checks and balances as intended are going to stop any potential government oppression. The presidency is much more powerful then what the framers had intended ever since FDR. Not to mention that Bureaucracies practically make up a 4th branch of the government. I'm not wrong saying that guns will never be taken from the people, guns are a fundamental right and they will never be completely collected. I never said regulations could never be put on them.

As for voter ID laws, I think they are vital. If someone is eligible to vote, why should they not have a government issued physical license that can be examined at polling stations? There completely prevents instances of people voting when they should not be.

As much of a tragedy this is, I would not be willing to hand over a single bullet to the US government and I work for the government as a contractor. People say that the “people kill people” argument is a cop out, but this couldn’t be further from the truth. Taking away that 2nd amendment right is just putting a bandage on a gapping, oozing hole in your leg and saying “It will be fine tomorrow!”

People ultimately are the executors of gun violence. The government needs to produce a better process to vet citizens and then people will not be able to purchase guns for being mentally unstable/unfit to do so. But blanketing this issue into a “NO GUN” and “ALL GUNS” category is ridiculous. The only answer I can see being probable for the US is “Some Guns”

Definitely a some gun solution. And Synthic this dude legally bought a gun despite that he shouldn't have which leads to the some gun solution.

There's really nothing that you can propose that would actually lower violent crime rates, people will always use illegal weapons and modifications. In fact, I feel as though making it more difficult for the average citizen to own and carry a weapon would do the contrary.

Doing nothing has done great things for our country! Not really.

This is an unrealistic evaluation. There are plenty of ways to help correct the gun violence here in the US.....however no one has the political will to do so thanks to the NRA, who prove that lobbying = legal corruption.

Nothing wrong with an average citizen waiting a couple days more or even weeks to get their gun.....

What gun legislation would you propose, that does not already exist, that could have prevented the Texas shooting?

Force military to report domestic violence convictions and update their criminal code to recognize it. Enforce current backgorund checks in gunshows and make straw sales illegal.

Well as you know, legislature that revoked this shooters ability to purchase and own a gun is already in place. So suggesting that any new legislation would have such a significant impact is just wrong, it is simply a failure of bureaucracy, specifically the FBI if you ask me.