Restricting people's 2nd Amendment Right will reduce American violence

If you were able to look at my response beyond the first paragraph, I was not making a point to make a statement on what you are or are not. I was making my case on the issue. And, Secondly, yes, this debate is about gun control and let's proceed on with it. Your main claim is that people with mental illnesses should not receive guns, and that, my friend, has flaws. The word and term mental illness is being used vaguely. "Even among the 1 percent of the U.S. population with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, it is rare to find people who are a risk of harm to others or at risk of acting violently. Despite the widespread belief that a person with serious mental illness like bipolar disorder or schizophrenia can be dangerous, only 3 to 4 percent of all the violent acts committed in a given year in the U.S. are committed by people who have been diagnosed with commonly cited mental illness of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or depression." Also, "It"s important to note that those with diagnosed serious mental illness, who are determined by a psychiatrist to be a serious risk of harm to themselves or others, already get admitted to acute or long-term inpatient care and are kept there until they are deemed not dangerous." This means that 1) it is already difficult from dangerously mentally ill people to obtain a firearm and 2) many who suffer from a mental illness is not at risk of harming themselves or others. Yes, Nik Cruz, among others were "mentally ill" school shooters that was the cause of the innocent lives of many students. I do not want kids to be afraid of school as I am a high school student myself. But here's the thing: a restriction on the second amendment is not the solution. Here is why: Take this as an example: New Jersey Highway Law, as far as I am concerned, is 55 mph. Though, drivers, mentally ill or otherwise, have reached 70, 80, or even 100 mph. As a result, "There had been 628 traffic fatalities in New Jersey in 2017 and still rising " the most since 2007 and on pace to finish the year with nearly 100 more deaths than at the recent low point in 2013, when fatalities had dipped to the lowest mark in 91 years" The point is, the establishment of a law is different from the enforcement or enactment of one. Take the most extreme case: banning all guns in America for the mentally ill. Do you seriously think that you would stop seeing guns in this country? State? City? Neighborhood? Do you think that there is no way for someone who wanted to commit a crime to commit that crime anyway regardless of the rules? Rules are not followed by those who do not want to follow them, and saying that EVERY mentally ill people does not have the right to self protect is an infringement of our American democracy. In fact, that statement is an over-generalization, indicating that any person, with any form of mental illness, does not have the right to protect themselves due to the selfish and terrible acts of a few. Those people who have a mental illness and intend to do no harm are now even more vulnerable to those who do not even follow the law, leaving them defenseless. The answer to a reduced amount of mass shootings in schools is to look at in school security, cyber bullying, and perimeter defenses. All schools should have metal detectors, knowing on sight whether there is a suspicious person at the entrance, veterans who want a job should get hired to work in the hallways with a firearm should be able to protect their students, and kids need to feel safe when taking derivatives of functions and the integral of a quadratic. Sources: http://nj1015.com... https://www.theatlantic.com...