Guns don't kill people ....

[Lamplighter]

Originally Posted by Ibram

Lamp: would tighter gun laws have prevented that? How MUCH tighter?
Assuming that a British style no-guns proposal would be unconstitutional, and barring repealing the second amendment...
What do you propose as a solution?

My short answer is: Yes, tighter gun laws could prevent that sort of massacre.
What do I propose as a solution ? That's a longer discussion.

I've invited the so-called pro-gun Dwellars to answer the same sort of question
and not surprisingly there's been no response.
They know this sort of thing is happening, but choose to do/say nothing about it.

That's not surprising because right now the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is to their favor.
The NRA is running with it, and lobbying feverishly to pass their manly "Stand Your Ground" laws.
Just the name of that law makes the weak feel strong.

Personally, and contrary to what Lookout123 has assumed, I have no problem with guns, per se,
I have owned them since high school, and still have one.

As policy, I have no problem with guns used for hunting, either for meat or trophy
--- so long as the hunt is "fair chase".
As policy, I have no problem with guns (or CCL's) issued when the individual's job or
career presents a need for one, i.e., as an agent in busines that needs protection.
(e.g., as an agent for a bank or $-guard, body guard, criminal attorney, etc.)

I do have a problem with every Joe Blow citizen, like my next door neighbor, having a gun
just because he lives in fear that someone somewhere might do something he doesn't like.

I put the blame where the fault lies... with the ATA and the NRA.
It is my belief about the way things are going due to the current interpretation
of the 2nd Amendment, that society will eventually recognize that the argument
about "self defense" is fallacious, and the fact that guns are doing unjustifiable harm to individuals and to society, itself.

When that happens, the judicial interpretation of the 2nd Amendment will change,
and guns be allowed in specific light of maintaining a well-regulated militia (e.g., National Guard)
only as necessary for the security of the free state, and not to feed the politics of the NRA.
.