You will notice that in not a single one of the cases [high-profile mass shootings] listed above did a perpetrator buy his weapon through an “unregulated private sale,” through “the Internet,” or in “the parking lot at a gun show.” Not one. Instead, in each and every case, one of two things happened: Either (a) the killer followed the law to the letter, or (b) he broke it spectacularly. That Sandy Hook involved little children made it that much harder to bear. But it did not change the salient fact: that massacrs eand [sic] private sales have pretty much nothing to do with one another.
So are they really wanting to “save innocent lives”? Or do they have other goals, and the death of children is merely a vehicle for them to play on the emotions of the public?
If they are sincere in their efforts to “save innocent lives” then I suggest taking a step back and reexamining priorities and solutions, and being willing and open to new solutions. You know the saying about how the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results? Well, suggesting these same “solutions” to “gun violence” over and over, when they are demonstrated to not work, well… that’s just insane. So if you are sincere in a desire to end violence, then I suggest you start looking at other solutions instead of the ones that don’t work.
Else, we can only think you are stubborn, ignorant, or nefarious.