All of the major terror attacks in the U.S. for at least eight years, where guns were used, the shooters had licensed weapons and many had background checks done. This recent shooting was done in a gun free zone, as were most. If it wasn’t a gun free zone, he likely would not have been able to kill so many. It could be said that one of the problems in this latest shooting is that people followed the rules and left their guns at home.
There are many that are quite able at figuring out how to craft laws around this subject that will limit the people from getting weapons. I want to know which of you can find a way for people to reject their evil ways and embrace love for their fellow man? Aren’t gun control laws just a less-than-clever idea to separate the evil from the man? Great Britain outlawed guns long ago; now they have a stabbing violence issue, and are trying to get people to turn in their knives.
Laws don’t prevent the evil from having their way with the law abiding; they prevent the law abiding from stopping those under the control of evil from following through. Since the gun free zone very likely created the environment that made the carnage worse, could it not be said that, however well-intended, the gun free zone affected evil on the law abiding? Is it also possible that all of the law tweaking suggested lately, no matter how well-intended, may also become the partner to evil in the same way?
It should be at least a point of interest that Chicago, the US city with the strictest gun control laws, has near the highest gun murder/gun violence rate in America. Also, the states with the least restrictive conceal carry laws, have the lowest gun murder/gun violence rates in America. If you think regulating guns more because you think they are evil is a good idea, then be consistent and propose regulating gun free zones because they exacerbate the carnage. We cannot stop the evil, but we can make them think twice.
The only known picture of government regulation!