N1611B wrote:The problem I have with most gun control proposals is that they aren't likely to solve the problem. Take background checks and mass shootings, for example. El Paso...Dayton...Las Vegas...Orlando...etc. They all passed background checks. Very few mass shooters wouldn't pass a background check. The background check bill that many are clamoring for now would have not prevented any of the shootings I listed. With regard to urban and drug-related gun crime, which makes up the majority of gun homicides in the United States, most of those weapons are obtained and carried illegally, so background checks wouldn't stop that crime, either.
"Assault weapons" are another target (no pun intended), but banning them would do nothing. More people are killed with blunt objects each year in the United States than are killed by rifles of any kind. Magazine limits? Good in theory, but a halfway skilled shooter can reload in seconds. All they would need would be a second weapon to keep anyone wanting to intervene at bay until their primary weapon could be reloaded. Not to mention that some of the deadliest mass shootings in the United States didn't even involve rifles of any kind. The Va Tech shooter killed 32 people with handguns. The Navy Yard shooter used a shotgun and a pistol that he took from a guard that he killed. Banning co-called "assault rifles" would only make it marginally more difficult for those who wish to do so to create carnage.
So what's the solution? Is passing some new bills that make us feel better about things but that do little, if anything, to solve the problem at hand? I don't think so. People advocating for measures like the background check bill and the assault weapons ban may be thrilled if those measures come to pass, but would inevitably be disappointed when the mass violence continues. So what then?
Terrible supposition and patently illogical. Terrorism is arguably impossible to thwart in every case, yet massive resources are devoted to stopping as many incidents as possible. The same with aviation safety, electrical installations, and many other safety concerns. If we follow your logic, we should ban swimming pools instead of combatting terror, since drownings kill far more Americans annually than Islamists or domestic supremacists do. It’s just silly. Any improvement in safety is just that - improvement - and arguably, banning assault weapons would have some impact.