I'm not going to discuss the merits of gun control legislation for two reasons. First, there are none. Second, the people who now want to deprive me of my 2nd Amendment Rights don't care about the merits, or lack thereof, of the legislation they wish enacted, they only want more power over me.
See, Sandy Hook Elementary doesn't matter to them. Neither did the Aurora, CO theater shooting. Neither did any previous mass shooting. If those events actually mattered, they would have put together this series of events:
- Bad guy selects location where victims have no ability to resist
- Bad guy goes on rampage
- When people with ability to resist show up, Bad guy surrenders or (just as likely) takes his own life.
Here's the thing. In none of those events would more gun control laws made anyone more safe, either. In the case of the Clock Tower sniper, there was no way to get to him until police stormed the tower. In the case of the bank robbers, they were heavily armored enough that even the police could not hurt them until they appropriated shotguns and those same "semi-automatic assault rifles" (an oxymoron) from a civilian gun dealer. Some guy with a Glock in an inside-the-pants concealed holster wasn't going to do much. In the case of the Gabriel Giffords, there were too many people in the way for a responsible gun owner to fire back at the assailant.
Let's examine that one a little more, because it's important. See, there were people at that event who were armed. But they were responsible, law abiding gun owners. At least one of them openly stated that he did not draw his weapon because he knew there was too great a chance of hitting an innocent.
When we talk about "gun control" what we really mean is restricting people like that very responsible and law abiding gun owner from being able to protect themselves. The bad guys aren't going to care about any gun laws; they've already decided to commit mass murder.
Democrats know this. Maybe some are truly earnest about wanting to "do something," but this kind of gun violence has existed since at least the 1920s. It isn't like the majority of them have not had time to figure it out. So their purpose cannot be to keep guns out of bad people's hands, they know they're not going to do that.
So why would they want to enact these laws? As I said above: Power. A disarmed populace is a compliant populace. If the citizenry have no means to resist tyranny, they are less likely to resist tyranny. The only purpose any politician can ever serve, whatever he has deluded himself into believing, by restricting gun ownership in any form is to empower tyrants.
I will not ever knowingly empower a tyrant. Not even passively.