That a legally owned item is stolen and then used in an illegal manor somehow justifies ownership restrictions is absurd.
Ordinarily such a claim would be laughed out of town, yet that is precisely the claim being made by the gun banners.
The gun used by Lanza was stolen. He then used the stolen gun in an illegal manner. Yet politicians known to have an agenda seem to think this justifies ownership restrictions.
Suppose a legally owned automobile is stolen and then used in an illegal manor, like racing. Would that somehow justify restrictions on automobile ownership? Of course not.
Ordinarily such a “justification” would not be possible. While emotions are high and people are suggestible, it is possible.
Politicians are trying to stampede an emotionally sensitized populace.
Never let a serious crisis go to waste... it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.
Exploiting this heinous crime is deplorable.