I watched the interview. While being interrupted, he was attempting to interject the qualifier "If there is a mentally disturbed family member" into that particular condition. It, of course, got talked over by the odious Redcoat Morgan.
If a person has a mentally unstable person in the house...for God's sake, lock up your weapons.
How hard is that, Ms Lanza? Put them in a frikken safe or find yourself shot in the face in the morning.
You are correct: He did attempt to insert that qualification.
Nonetheless, that is hardly reassuring. From requiring those with mental patients in their home to lock up their weapons, to requiring ALL of us to lock up our weapons... is a very short reach indeed.
Shapiro made me very uneasy when he said (more than once), “we need to calibrate our laws....” Remember: Shapiro is a Harvard-trained l-a-w-y-e-r.
So, I respectfully disagree with you. No more laws. We have more than enough laws on the books already. Actually, we need LESS laws on the books, with genuine enforcement of laws against murder, theft, etc (not against inanimate objects).
Going further (logically), as I have said elsewhere: No more “defending” the Second Amendment. To borrow a phrase used by our Chief Justice (about the odious Roe v Wade decision), it is “settled law.” It needs not to be defended. We need to demand of its detractors that they respect it or risk of being called subversive traitors, enemies (whether foreign or domestic).