That seems like a reasonable idea I haven't heard about. We might want to limit the legislation to automatic weapons so hopefully to reduce mass shootings and allowing defense against a home intruder.

@Grecio my idea - but it does not stop anyone owning a gun and seems easier to get the idea adopted

Already being done in many states.

@GrungeGirl90s You're right. Many states do but we need a nation wide plan. For example, the Gilroy shooter, last week, bought his assault weapon in Nevada and carried it into California.

I have also found this as an update with statistics taken from the Stanford Geospacial Center pertaining to gun violence, in particular, mass shootings. I will let you read the entire thing but I have highlighted a basic summation:

Extending the data back to the 1970s, two studies found evidence of a slight increase in the frequency of mass public shootings over the past three decades (Cohen, Azrael, and Miller, 2014; Krouse and Richardson, 2015). However, using an expanded definition that includes domestic- or felony-related killings, there is little evidence to suggest that mass shooting incidents or fatalities have increased (Cohen, Azrael, and Miller, 2014; Krouse and Richardson, 2015; Fox and Fridel, 2016). Thus, different choices about how to define a mass shooting result in different findings for both the prevalence of these events at a given time and whether their frequency has changed over time.
[rand.org]

@GrungeGirl90s

This is going to take a little time to go through, it's a weighty article. I see it was written in the first quarter of 2018, therefore it doesn't account for the shooting incidents for the last 3 quarters of 2018, and the first half of 2019. I think that in itself is significant, as I think the data from this last 15 months may change the entire calculus. I'll look at more thoroughly later today and get back to you. Thanks.

Democrats have been trying to get the CDC and NIH to look into it for at least a decade but GOP and NRA keep blocking it.

I'm sure you're right.

good call..

Then public outrage will never hit the tipping point required to effect real change. Restricting the media is, like, always counterproductive. Unless it's about the Kardashian's. Then its justified.

@1of5 Thats right lock those Kardashain's in a universal bath room and force them to suck the gas out of whip cream canisters until they agree to try and act normal lol.

@SeaGreenEyez. It is not just the tv the radio this was the major topic fueling the egos of the crimes repeatedly.

Many times the killer ends up dead. It's not about them getting rewarded. I don't think?

@RavenCT sometimes it's about notoriety, being a symbol for the cause, or seeing who gets the "mass murderer of the week" boy scout badge.

@1of5 Just as teen suicides can encourage more as I understand it.... I think it would be bad to see the media muffled on this. The government would already like us to believe it's all 'mental illness ' not access to weapons.
We need news to motivate people. (Sadly).

I can see it coming now. tax the internet and reduce free speech. Mark my words.

@SeaGreenEyez There are doubts as to the Tasmanian shooting origin just as there are doubts on the recent Vegas shootngs.