THIS IS A ROUGH DRAFT because I want to get up to date figures (where possible) and revise until we're as accurate as reasonable. I'm busy with a bunch of projects and will follow up later, but I have friends who may have the stats handy.

For the US as a whole, here's the arithmetic:
 
Half of households have at least one gun. Waiting period = worthless.
 
An unknown number can borrow one. We will table that, but keep it in mind.
 
Something like 80% of all violent crime takes place between midnight and 0500. (It has probably changed slightly since I first did this). There are no gun stores open during that time. Waiting period = irrelevant.
 
Only about .035% of people with guns ( larger subset than gun owners, since any convicted criminal may possess one, but doesn't legally own it) commit crimes with firearms.
 
So we're looking at the potential effect being on .000175% of the population. Statistically irrelevant.
 
Then there's the idiotic assumption that someone who is angry or insane to the point of lethality on Day 1 is stable by Day X and never has another issue. The number of people this would be true for is statistically zero.
 
And if someone DID find their partner in a cheating embrace, ran to the store, bought a gun, came back, found them both still there and shot them, there'd be a really good case for premeditation, not a crime of passion anyway.
 
Now, how many people with an actual threat from someone have been told a piece of paper will protect them, told to wait 10 days, and died before getting approval?


Because in response to another uncommon but visible mass shooting, the liberals are dancing around like a bunch of Kansas City faggots.*

Their second, entirely predictable reaction, is turn the shooter into a fucking superstar, with around the clock dissection of his life, times and person.  He'll have a Wikipedia page if he doesn't already, and they plan to demolish the school and build a MEMORIAL to him.  (I'm sure some liberal retard (pardon the redundancy) is going to insist, "No, the memorial is to the event!" ...oh, you mean that event he created? At a cost of tens of millions after you raze the school?)

Their third, rather than stop jerking off over murderous pieces of shit (Hell, they'd fuck the corpses if they thought they could get away with it), is to insist that all of us who were un-involved should be penalized. About like insisting, "This guy was a rapist, so we need to castrate everyone with a penis since we can't predict who might be next."

So, yes, go buy an AR15, or something even cooler, like an AUG or an FN2000. Because eventually they'll discover those and freak out.

And in the meantime, it supports our culture.

It means AR-15s become more normalized, to the point where asking to ban them is like asking to ban Toyota Camrys, not Dodge Vipers.

It means in a worst case that more guns are banned, despite SCOTUS rulings in our favor, the requirement to compensate us will fuck the liberal defecation machine for a trillion dollars or more.

It means if they violate a second Constitutional protection, and we have to throw down, we'll have all the firepower.

And in the meantime, it will give them more reasons to dance around like a bunch of Kansas City faggots...which is always hilarious.

*Movie reference, for the oversensitive pussies out there. Grow the fuck up.

Let me share my background.

I have 25 years of Expert Marksman ratings from the US Army and US Air Force, with rifle. I also qualified with Pistol more than once, and scored Expert with that as well. 

I have shot the M16, M16A1, M16A2, M4, M4A1, M15 (old USAF revolver).

I have shot the M60 General Purpose Machine Gun, the M2 Machine Gun (Browning .50 caliber). 

I have shooting trophies from the US Army.

I have served as an armorer--issuing and maintaining weapons.

I have served on the range as a line safety NCO, ammunition point NCO, range NCO, and primary marksmanship instructor. 

I've served as a weapons courier (responsible for transporting weapons) and as an armed courier (transporting other items while armed).

None of those actions are particularly impressive. They're only intended to show that I'm professionally qualified with weapons in the military.

As a civilian, I have beta-tested and reviewed firearms and accessories for manufacturers, furnishing promotional reviews, and feedback when the weapon did not perform as stated. I've even received firearms as gifts both as payment after the fact, and just because they think I'm an awesome writer.

I collect firearms.  I own...let's just say "a lot." 

My collection, in fact, has its own bank account.

My collection has its own incorporation papers.

My collection has its own lawyer on retainer.

Get that? A lot.

I own several restricted (National Firearm Act) weapons, that take money, paperwork, and federal approval to own, including actual machine guns, suppressors ("silencers") and short barreled rifles.

I have repaired, restored, examined literally hundreds of firearms in the last 33 years.

From raw materials, I have built firearms. And I don't mean bought a kit, though I've done that, too. I've turned solid blocks of metal into firearms. Dozens of them.

I've built my own firearm kits, specifying not only parts, but which alloys and heat treatment I wanted for those parts.

I have several correspondences with the Department of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives regarding said builds, to verify legality and technical matters.

I had a small part in helping draft firearm legislation at the state level.*

I've been active in promoting and supporting legislative movements.

I taught my kids to shoot starting at age 4.

I have written articles for firearm magazines in several countries. 

I also write fiction, but, as far as possible, I make the firearm use in said fiction factually accurate.

~~~

Now, possibly you've taken a first aid course at some point. If not, you're probably familiar with the instruction that, "When qualified medical personnel arrive on scene, follow their instructions."

Well, when you get to that part in your gun control debate where the professional arrives on scene...here I am.

Once the professional has arrived, it's bad form to insist they're incompetent, delusional, a nut, have no idea what they're talking about, etc.

Yet, so many of you do that.

Here's an example of a very simple question in gun control. If you've actually "studied" the matter, you'll have an answer without needing any googling or references:

With BATFE moving from Treasury Dept to Justice Dept under Homeland Security, should the federal firearm laws be relocated from Title 18 USC to Title 10 USC? Why or why not?

What's your answer?

Because if you don't have one, you're utterly unqualified to have an opinion on the subject of what laws we have, have tried, or might implement. Or, as importantly, how hard it would be to implement them, and the fallout and second and third order effects of doing so.

EDIT: 

Hilarious!

Someone finally found the errors in this statement, one of which was accidental.
 
ATF used to be with Treasury.  Title 26 is the Tax Code, and there are numerous taxes on firearms, so that's where firearm law really should have been.  ATF is now with Justice, and Title 18 is the criminal code, where it would reasonably be now.  Title 10 would be relevant to the militia acts, and that reference is Title 10, Ch 13, Sec 311.  And I mistyped late night about DHS, since ATF is under Justice, and "I regret the error," as they say on CNN.

So, I made a mistake and a mis-statement, and no one caught either.  Most notably none of the "experts" on gun control from the articles they've read on PuffHo and The Atlantic.

And it only took four days.

~~~

Which makes it really hard to "have a discussion" about gun control.  Because you don't need a discussion. You need an education. And you don't want a discussion or education. You want to dictate, from ignorance and fear.

One of the common refrains recently has been, "You gun nuts need to come up with something, because doing nothing is no longer an option."

So, if you're conceding that your 150 years of trying to do something constitute "doing nothing," I agree with you, as far as outcome.

Which means you're admitting your ignorance-inspired efforts have been worthless.

In which case, isn't it time you stepped aside, and let the doctor work?  Rather than insisting on power crystals and holy water, and burning garlic in sacrifice to the gods, or whatever you're absolutely positive will fix the problem this time?

And since you come from a background of ignorance and superstition, you're almost certainly going to be outraged when the professional tells you, "Your myths are irrelevant, accomplish nothing, and often make things worse."  But whether or not you're outraged, that's the fact. And your own admission that your 150 years of effort constitute "Doing nothing" is proof. You have no idea what you're talking about, but want your claims validated.

Well, that's not going to happen.

When you blame attacks on "white supremacy," you're virtue signaling, and you look like an idiot.

When you try to conflate the NRA and the KKK, who were on completely different sides of the race debate when they were created, and still are, you're virtue signaling and look like an idiot. (And it doesn't matter what you've read in some leftist rag by someone else ignorant, no matter what alleged credentials they claim.)

When you claim suppressors allow "silent assassinations," or speak of "high capacity clips" (sic), or that "bump stocks [sic] turn rifles into machine guns more dangerous than what the military uses," or reference "the shoulder thing that goes up" or talk about "assault weapons" based on what stock and grip two identical rifles have, you're being a complete tool. You're not "saving lives," you're not "promoting gun safety," you're flapping around like an idiot and making a scene.

If you say you want to "compromise," you're lying, because we've spent 150 years "compromising" with your ignorant bleats, and, as you admit, have "accomplished nothing."

So if you have any intellect whatsoever, you should probably take this opportunity to shut the fuck up and let the experts handle it before you kill another patient.

Now, you will probably not like what most of the experts have to say on the matter.  But the fact is, we are experts, you're not, and as you like to claim in science, we have consensus.

Here's one of my articles to show why you're wrong about, well, everything:
https://www.thegunmag.com/time-eliminate-gun-control-laws-yes/ 

And as to the solution to the problem you think you see: That has to be social and cultural, just as it was with the "problem" of liquor leading up to and during Prohibition, and as it is for marijuana and other recreational and potentially pharmaceutical drugs.

Which, as you might recall, also became "epidemics" because ignorant idiots insisted they knew the answers, until experts finally talked some sense into them.

Now please be quiet, the adults are talking.

~~~

*And since one of you idiots tried recursive logic and claimed that by helping draft legislation I completely countered my own argument and "made himself worthless, good going buddy," I'll point out the legislation I was involved with was to REDUCE the legislation created by you idiots.  GFY.

Someone was disputing the means of dealing with Lil Fat Phuck in Korea. I said he should have been ignored. They asked why police have negotiators instead of ignoring an asshole with hostages and a weapon.

He wasnΓÇÖt an asshole with a weapon until recently. Pussies kept giving him street cred and money. They should have let him wail and tantrum (and his dynasty before him) and ignored the pacifier-spitting.

Trump publicly said, in effect, "Lil Fat Fuck, touch that button and South Korea will be Only Korea, it will be an island, you will be dead, glowing vapor and remembered as an irrelevant piece of shit in the midden heap of history. I personally control more wealth than this shitshow you jokingly call a ΓÇ£nation.ΓÇÖΓÇ¥

And gee, suddenly Lil Fat Phuck is considering negotiation. 

You donΓÇÖt negotiate with toddlers or terrorists. You explain the rules, you punish them.

The route taken here is the same route Carter took with Iran. You can't appease a sociopath with rewards.  It just makes them triple down.

Carter's response should have been, ΓÇ£You canΓÇÖt get our people out of the embassy because of a riot you canΓÇÖt control? Wait one.ΓÇ¥

SPECTRE cuts an orbit, shreds every living thing around the Embassy into graunched hamburger.

ΓÇ£WeΓÇÖve cleared the riot for you as a favor. Can you now ensure our people make it to the airport? If not, we can send more freedom.ΓÇ¥

And that would have prevented EVERY Middle Eastern problem we’ve had since. Some areas of the world--the Middle East, parts of Africa, parts of Asia, ONLY respond to strength. There is no "peer" in their culture. Only the top, and the bottom.  You must command, or you will be subjugated. Show that you're willing to kill them in job lots, while making them aware they can do nothing in response, makes you the top, and them the supplicant.

When violence IS the answer, pussy-bitchism is not a workable substitute. You use the violence. You use it decisively. You use it effectively.

Especially when you can literally escalate to genocide without even leaving your office.

As to that police negotiator? He’s doing two things. Trying to get the punk to surrender, while keeping him busy until the shooter is in place. If the punk hasn’t surrendered by then…