[MartinSE]

Originally Posted by Trayderjoe

Unfortunately that was not clear in the original reply.

Sorry

Not sure what this has to do with my post, seems to "muddy the waters"

Our exchange was about difficulty in obtaining a drivers license vs a gun. Driving restrictions after you have the license are also more strict than a firearm.

Well not quite. In order to purchase a firearm in Texas, you need either a driver's license or a Texas State ID (link) for which you need proof of the following:

U.S. Citizenship or, if you are not a U.S. Citizen, evidence of lawful presence.
Texas Residency
Identity and
Social Security Number

So BEFORE you can even buy a gun in Texas, you have to either meet the requirements of a driver's license or have lawfully obtained a Texas State ID. THEN you still need to pass a FEDERALLY required background check. Oh and by the way, my original request still stands, please provide proof that it is easier to buy a gun legally than to get a driver's license "in many states". The Texas example doesn't work.

You left out my saying in my post that you were retired to provide ID, etc. In other words sates define who CAN NOT buy a gun, but many place no requirements other than things that mean you are NOT being allowed.

My post referenced Texas requirements for gun purchase as an example of one of the many you requested. And you left out/ignored the numerous testing, training and demonstrations of competency I listed, which does show it is much "harder" to get a gun than a drivers license, which is exactly what you asked for and then ignored.

As to proving many states, I used a state which is pertinent to THIS conversation as an example - Texas, I will leave it up to you to find the others that have more requirements.

Hint: I don't know of a single state that doesn't require some testing to obtain a drivers license - competency, vision, etc. - I know some states that require competency testing to buy a gun, but I don't think all do. All states require some kind of testing to prove driving knowledge (some will accept other states license as proof). So, I feel safe in suggesting it will not be hard to find that proof. I often get PMs complaining about too many references/links and too long posts. So, have fun, and if you go to the trouble to check all states and find no others or even fewer than half, I would be very interested. (But I am sure that will not happen).

I too have been trained in multiple methodologies such as Root Cause Analysis and Six Sigma. What is consistent is identifying the problem and sustainable fixes. Handling "low hanging fruit" is easy in a company for example, where the "bosses" have the ability to shutdown an operation temporarily while these interim fixes are implemented. However, we are not talking about a company with a somewhat limited set of stakeholders but a country with so many more different stakeholders.

I agree root cause is vital and in complex situations can take a long time to determine.

Many of the companies I worked for has issues with production lines that would cost the company hundreds of thousands of dollars per hour to shut down and so that was NOT an option unless lives were at risk. It is possible to find and implement temporary "work arounds" or patches on live systems.

Are you suggesting we do nothing and just accept the death toll that is growing almost weekly for the past twenty years until we can determine with some level of certainty the root cause? I hope not.

And let me close this post bye saying thank you for the civil discourse and pertinent comments and questions. If more would do this we could make progress. It is possible, and you sir are proof.