"These folks that say these things are just prescribing aspirin for brain cancer."

Respectfully, No sir. They are prescribing placebos.

Thinking armed guards in a school are going to prevent murder and gunfire is shortsighted. Columbine had security which IIRC was armed. Tactically, admitting an armed guard is needed implies a backup is needed. I can foresee an entire security, communications and surveillance assessment that would fundamentally change the "feel" of most campuses. I would expect many people would be uncomfortable with that.

Thinking a "gun-free" sign will mean anything to aa individual determined on mayhem has often been proven wrong.

These big gun reform acts try to do too much. IMHO they are the F-111 of gun-control. Wayne LaNRA's list of things to do is similar attempt to throw all the available mud at the wall. My opinion is that these large lists or big pieces of legislation are more for public show than effect. Meant to gather popularity and votes among constituents and passage in congress and state houses to further the recognition and authority of the authors. If that were not so, hands would be reaching across aisles and ideological divides to find common ground and maintain an atmosphere of compromise and continued discussion.

I'm not seeing that. It's just posturing and, as you said, placebos, different placebos for either side but generally placebos.

The war on drugs is dying a slow silent death. Let us now start the war on guns. I'm sure they will go more peacefully.

...is identifying a common enemy.

The klan does that.
Adolf did that.
In the '80s the US did that. (What's that, Taliban, you guys are fighting the Soviets and we should help you? Okay here. That worked well.)
Who started that war on drugs? You mean drugs aren't really the enemy?
Wasn't alcohol just a drug? (Been there; done that. Repeat the 1920s anyone?)

By all means let's find a way to create a new black market and suspect crime will decrease.