I don't believe a government monopoly is the best.
I'm not advocating for open war against non-criminals.
I'm definitely not demanding for government violence against peaceful people.
The problem is the number of school shootings in the USA.
The solution, I think, is increased mental health services, increased resources into lower-income communities, increased gun regulations and police reform.
They're all complicated and expensive solutions but I think the number of mass shootings and school shootings is worth the increased effort and expenditure.
For school shootings in particular, I believe part of the issue is the ease and speed in which people can legally get themselves a high-powered weapon and then use that weapon on the innocent.
You think that the solution is to deter the shooters by increasing the number of guns in schools. I don't agree with that solution.
I personally think that limiting who can access those weapons (ie, people with a history of domestic abuse) and increasing the requirements so that people have to prove their competency would help reduce the numbers of school shootings. If a non-government agency is in charge of that process, that's fine, as long as there are results. It may take years to work out the systems and processes, which is unfortunate but understandable.
If I refuse to obey new laws, but do not violate the life, liberty, or property of others, how am I a criminal, and how is violence against me justified? Just answer that simple question.
I know this answer is frustrating... but I think this is too simple a question.
All of our actions affect others.
Let's say you're choosing to purchase a pair of shoes.
There's two that you like... and you don't know anything about them.
One pair is made by child slavery overseas and the other is made by an American shoemaker.
You probably don't think you're violating the life, liberty or property of others... you're just buying a pair of shoes! People do exactly that all the time.
But buying the pair made by child slavery provides incentives, which forces more children into shoe-making slavery and you have actually, unknowingly, violated the liberty of someone else.
I see this in a similar way.
You having the freedom to buy an AR-15 in a private sale with no records whatsoever and no checks on your safety knowledge or intentions, also means someone with ill intent can do the same. By voting for representatives that push for unlimited access to firearms you do end up affecting the lives, liberty and property of others, even if that's not what you intended.
Living in a society is amazing. We don't have to do literally everything ourselves for ourselves. We can share resources and specialize and look after each other, but for society to work we do have to make small sacrifices in personal freedoms for the health and wellbeing of the group. From a purely selfish perspective, the healthier the group is, the better it can look after us.
Just curiously, how do you know you'll never violate the life, liberty or property of another? What stops you from snapping one day and shooting hundreds of people? What if you get drunk and accidentally shoot your neighbor's house? How can you be sure you won't develop dementia, get confused and shoot a girl scout in the face? What happens if someone breaks into your house when you're not home, steals all your guns and ammo and shoots up into a crowd?
If I had a mental health crisis, I'm probably pretty limited in the damage I could do... but if you had a crisis you could potentially destroy thousands of lives. That's a lot of responsibility.