In reply to John Flynn.

I could nick-pick a couple of things, but all-in-all, I don't disagree enough to not come together with you on this (and I don't know if it is all that helpful). The goal is progress, not getting everyone to 100% agree on everything.

I totally agree that gun laws need to have teeth. I think (or at least assume) the point of gun-free zones was to deter crime around the school, e.g. a drug dealer selling on the corner next to the school carrying a gun would have the book thrown at them. An honest question is why only make the laws more severe next to a school? I'd be interested in seeing data on the success of gun-free zones. If I remember right, the zones existed before CHLs. Did they actually do anything?

It is a myth that a gun-free zone makes an area safer through some magical bubble. Someone who wants to carry a gun somewhere will do so no matter what a sign says. I'm not sure if there is a causal link between the location of the shootings and the gun free zone piece. I think evaluating the success of the idea, what objectives did it meet or fail to meet, and how could it be changed (or removed) to better meet the objectives is a good thing.

I do think the language between people in the political space makes it hard. Perhaps it is naive, but I really don't think the labels of liberal or conservative gain much of anything for us. I'm not a liberal. I'm pro-life. I think the last thing a police officer wants to do is take a life and if they do so, I defer to their judgement—though I think very careful review should still happen. But, the solution to gun violence being more guns (even in the hands of well-trained honest folks) concerns me. I'm not there. I really don't want to disarm everyone either—as mentioned before, going to the range is a great time—but I don't think the 2nd amendment requires what the NRA says it does (something former Justice and once-Republican, now seemingly unaffiliated John Paul Stevens has written about).

The company I work for has a saying that communication is oxygen. I think this discussion needs more of it and, truly, I appreciate your thoughts, John.