The worst school massacre in history didn't involve firearms. The second worst school massacre in US history didn't involve so-called "assault weapons" (where "assault" weapon is analogous to saying "painting racing stripes on a high performance sports car makes it a death machine"). That asshole had 2 pistols. Existing CT law at the time of the Sandy Hook School shootings already banned
high performance sports cars with racing stripes painted on them assault weapons, so the weapons Lanza used would be legal under any future "assault weapons" (a term applied to cosmetic features of guns) ban.
I want to say something about how much I loathe the people who would stand on dead bodies, like George Bush did with that megaphone on the rubble and bodies of the dead on 9/11, to further a pre-determined political position (e.g. if you wanted to ban assault weapons the day BEFORE the Sandy Hook Massacre, and are now using the deaths of those children to further your political agenda of banning so-called "assault weapons", you disgust me), but that's non-productive so I won't. But using dead children as a political "wedge issue" really IS disgusting.
When will liberals get serious and address the issue of why gun violence has increased so dramatically IN RECENT HISTORY?
Semi-automatics have been around since the turn of the 20th century, 1905, or so. With the proper license you can still buy a full auto in the US (although I'm not aware of any mass killings using one, recently).
Clearly something has changed, and clearly the change is;
A) Recent (say, in the past 20 or 30 years, but that date range is open to interpretation, but NOT open to interpretation back to the turn of the 20th century), and
B) NOT RELATED TO GUN OWNERSHIP!
How's about we fund some studies, by well-qualified research groups, competing for funding in a competitive granting process, into what's changed? Isn't that a "progressive" way to do things?
When will we demand that the media stop glorifying these mass killers?
When will we call them the cowards that they are, thus reducing their belief that the "winner" of the "video game" is the one who kills the most?
To this day, I can't tell you the name of the man who killed John Lennon. This is by intent. I, personally, have relegated him to the dustbin of history.
We need to look into the abandonment of parental responsibility in favor of over-medicating children who are "different".
I'm throwing out ideas, and may have more of my own, but I'm open to suggestion.
The one thing that's clear is, all this talk about guns isn't productive. Banning guns, when there are already mnillions in circulation, won't help. Banning high-cap mags, when there are already 100s of millions in circulation, doesn't help.
Getting all those guns and magazines out of private hands is a pipe dream that doesn't help. There's no way a so-called "assault weapons" ban will pass the House, and even if a high-cap magazine ban passes, there are so many out there that it won't make a difference.
This whole discussion is a waste of time.
I probably shouldn't even hit "post".