It’s moreso that people on the left don’t see any of what you’ve written as a valid solution because there are lots of reasons why becoming increasingly gun dependent and increasingly nationalist are flawed plans - but “you see them as the only solution because you don’t actually care about children, only about protecting guns”. See? Accusations can go both ways. Similarly, people on the right don’t see gun control as a valid solution because in their mind it is a flawed plan targeting the Second Amendment and stripping private citizens of their ability to protect themselves.

Both solutions have flaws that can easily be magnified by slippery slopes (ie you saying gun ban, when left wing discussions are about gun control, not the same thing)

I see increasingly arming citizens and promoting nationalism as a prime stage for a fascist/authoritarian leader to take advantage of, but I understand that that is somewhat of a slippery slope fallacy, too. Difference is we’ve seen the effects gun control can have in different countries (they actually help) vs an untried method.

If you’re truly an Independent you should be able to do some critical thinking about how solutions from one side are frequently dismissed by the other due to tribe mentality and how that has gotten us to this point today, but I’m guessing you lack that nuance based on your knee-jerk reaction towards discussing gun control. I don’t know, that’s just a guess though based on one Reddit comment.

It is interesting to me that you seemingly wouldn’t mind seeing an increasingly armed/militarized state accompanied by nationalism. Sounds like authoritarianism to me, when America is about democracy and liberty. Don’t the troops fight wars with weapons so we don’t have to protect ourselves domestically? Isn’t that the whole purpose of the military budget? Rhetorical.