He made several misstatements and assumptions.
The most glaring of these was “It’s people who lack licenses you have to fear.” This statement is disabused by noting those states where *no* license of any kind are needed.
Licenses change little, because a good person without a license is just as responsible as a good person without one.
Prohibitions matter, but it is more important that they be for *genuine* need, such as felony convictions. That is, unless judges in those states are allowed to restore gun rights after sentence has been served. Far more difficult, but not impossible, is to prohibit guns from the demonstrably mentally ill. People who in earlier times were said to “represent a possibility of harm to themselves or others.” A good as definition as any.
Another error of the writer: “There was a recent episode in a Chicago suburb when a 56-year-old man with a permit blasted away at a fleeing armed robbery suspect, forcing a cop to take cover.”
There is no real problem here, either. While the officer was wise to take cover *when his presence was not known* to the armed victim, (in much of the US) the victim was within his rights to fire on the fleeing robber.
Not in Illinois. Once a perp "turns and runs" we are bound by the law to let them go. Shooting at them while they're in the act of fleeing turns us into the criminal here in IL.
I say that having been through Illinois' CCW training, taught by a retired Marine and Illinois State Trooper.
That's the law. I didn't write it, don't complain to me how stupid it is. You'll be preaching to the choir.