Over 90% of all mass killers have one or both of these things in common:
1) They come from broken homes.
2) They were on, or currently on mood altering pharmaceuticals.
Columbine was the exception, but the rule is clear.
As for the broken home piece, both the killer and his younger brother were adopted together - which means they were either in Foster care, or from a relative who gave them up. At minimum, the killer was at least 2 years old when adopted since news reports say his younger brother was 17. Their adoptive mother was 51 at the time she took care of these kids - a remarkable age to be taking in one infant, and a 2 year old if the reported timeline checks out. In the second case, nothing is fully verified, but some are quoted about the killer being "on medication". I'm certain this will be confirmed.
This killer isn't a product of "too many guns" but rather the natural outcome of a society that sloughs off any commitment to family, disparages personal responsibility, and promotes the hyper medication of children as an easy way to control them. Before everyone clutches their pearls about how horrible this may sound, do the research yourself. Facts can be a terrible thing sometimes.
So, do we ban divorce and meds, just as everyone wants to now ban "scary looking guns" (see below) No, because you cannot reshape society overnight, just as you cannot ban lawfully obtained weapons from being misused. There can be tweaks to the law = example: If you're on any mood altering medicine, you must hand over HOUSEHOLD weapons to law enforcement for safe keeping. "but.. but... we need a gun for safety..." OK, let us hold your guns, and give you a Taser in the mean time. Want a "bump stock"? Sure, why not, as long as they can pnly be rented only at shooting range. How about "no-bail, no parole, one-and-done" for anyone using a gun during a crime?
These are the kind of common sense gun laws I think most people would support - caretaking, not confiscation, and meaningful incarceration for real criminals.
As to the argument that "no one should have access to assault rifles" an article for you to review:
[url]https://www.policeone.com/the-tacticalist/articles/7209499-Assault-weapons-vs-sporting-weapons-Whats-the-difference/[/url]
Yes, 99.9% of all mass killers have one thing in common: the use of a gun during their spree (although some now are starting to use trucks now...) If after reading what an "assault rifle" if you still think banning a weapon group because they look frightening to you will solve this problem, perhaps living in a "gun free zone" like Chicago or Washington DC might convince you otherwise.
My .02c
SGIP
