You do realize that even if guns were magically banished from existence (Or however you think Gun Control works), she could just as easily have gone to the kitchen, grabbed a knife and carried out the same exact actions, right?
That is one of the fundamental flaws about gun control; The root issue is never addressed, you're just going after a symptom
(Violent unhinged people being Violent & Unhinged). Now granted, we can't know in advance which people are going to commit violent crimes, so while I do not agree with disarming the population (Which thankfully is against the 2nd Amendment), I get that the next best scenario is to somehow limit the possibilities of more at risks populations from getting guns;
However, the problem with those types of policies becomes a question of, who gets to define "At Risk Populations", what is the criteria to be considered "At Risk" and finally is there sufficient Due Process?
Here is a great example of the insidious nature of these types of policies and the tactlessness of their proponents.
no fly no buy
In a nutshell, if you were one of the unfortunate American Citizens to end up on the
"No Fly List", you would also be
disqualified to purchase a gun. That sounds all well and good, until you realize that
ANYONE could end up on the No Fly List for virtually any reason or no reason at all, and
WORSE,
there is no Due Process and no way to appeal against the decision after the fact! This is just one of countless examples of the
disgusting overreach that the so called
"Public Servants" of the Federal Government are guilty of (and this goes for both of the major Political Parties, just so we're clear).
The whole issue is just a damn mess, and while I personally would much rather have a
population that is capable of defending themselves (Including it's most vulnerable members such as the Elderly & Physically Disabled neither of which could reasonably be expected to fight off a random thug, Burglar, etc in a fair fight), and are
not at the mercy of corrupt Law Enforcement Agents or other Violent Unhinged people, I concede that as things currently are, it is up to individual state's how they decide to regulate the purchase and possession of weapons within their borders.
Bottom line, the issue is not so Black & White, and it is
EXTREMELY naive to expect Gun Violence
(or Violence in general) to cease if Guns were banned, confiscated, or whatever on a national level
(Criminals don't care about the Law, they were never going to comply anyways). At least if
law abiding citizens (AKA The majority of people) are able to
obtain guns with as few obstacles as possible, then most people would
at least stand a chance of defending themselves against their would be assailants (
Whom again, were never going to abide by Anti Gun Laws anyways); Heck, even if one chooses to opt out of owning/possessing a gun under such a system (Myself for example because of depression), those people would still benefit from a sort of
"Herd Immunity" So to speak, in that
many gun owners choose to Conceal Carry, so without knowing who is carrying, the safest solution from the assailants POV would be not to take any chances
(Or do and find out the hard way).
Just some food for thought.
