[sargon]

What's "not good" about thorough background checks? I've read that this young man had been treated for mental illness, and that he had been expelled from school for various violent tendencies. The red flags were clearly there. The schools should be required to report this information to law enforcement. Any measures which don't infringe on Unalienable Rights should be on the table for consideration.

And no gun-seller should be required to sell a gun to anyone they have reservations about.

I understand that it's a slippery slope, but there are two options: measures which infringe on Unalienable Rights, and measures which don't infringe on them. As gun owner's, we're duty bound to seek out the latter, or else the propagandists will ensure the former.

Having said that, it's also incumbent on gun rights advocates to staunchly and articulately defend those rights, and to repudiate the emotional, "feel good" measures which the Leftists propose—measures which both infringe on Unalienable Rights and are also ineffective.

[onedoug]

#40

[goldstategop]

The tragedy is the killer is also a victim.

If someone had locked up in the first place, 17 kids would be alive today.

But liberals don’t like to hold mentally ill people where they can be treated without endangering others or themselves.

Some people are simply not capable of functioning in society. Its not humane or compassionate to leave such ticking human time bombs to their own devices.

As long as we refuse to face up to it, more mass murders are inevitable in the future. Guns are not the problem. Mentally ill people are the problem.