Here's the picture everybody saw of him cleaning before the shooting. Obviously you have no memories of the actual situation.

Whatever you say bro.

It was just an example of highly exaggerated "news" pushing anti-gun opinions. It's also extremely obvious so I thought it was a good thing to point out. It's all part of the won't someone please think of the children angle to try and convince people to give up their rights. Don't get me wrong Fox News is absolute shit but that doesn't excuse the other side telling lies.

https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2018/08/27/640323347/the-school-shootings-that-werent

The fact that the media reports shootings in the vicinity of schools as school shootings to pump up the numbers is evidence on my side.

Honestly, if you're interested in how guns are effective against missiles and jet planes, look at Vietnam or Afghanistan. Then again I think privately owned jet fighters and missiles isn't out of the bounds of reality.

I'm concerned (reasonably) that mass media and constant misinformation/disinformation campaigns on social media and other platforms are changing peoples' minds not with facts but with lies and deception. I don't think this is controversial.

What? I think you might be confused. The only ones hiding their true intent are those trying to ban all guns while claiming "reasonable restrictions". The Second Amendment is historically significant to the founding of the US and is based in the ability of a nation to defend itself with or without a standing army. Human nature has remained the same. Recent failures in "catch and release" or soft on crime prosecutors has shown that despite trying to be progressive and change the way we treat criminals the criminals haven't changed. They're still the same as they've always been.

Human nature being what it is, until we have perfect mass surveillance and zero freedoms we will continue to have a need to protect ourselves from bad actors.

I'm also of the belief that once a person has served their sentence and been released there shouldn't be any additional future punishments stemming from prior convictions. They should have all their rights restored. It certainly could be kept as a record to affect their future criminal punishments were they to reoffend, but if the punishment they received wasn't enough and they have to be punished more then it should have been a part of the initial conviction sentencing.

17 year olds are typically only restricted from handguns. Go ahead and point to the law that says he wasn't allowed to possess a long gun at that time. Maybe you should have been on the prosecution if you're so good.