I'm not sure if a relative who went there on vacation is affected or not yet :/.
That said it annoys the hell out of me when people use arguments like "YEAH IM SURE THIS GUY WOULD REALLY FOLLOW YOUR NEW GUN LAWS" as a counter-argument to gun control though.
What's the point in having any law then - every single law we have is broken by someone, at some point after all? Obvious answer is laws (and the punishment from them) are a deterrent, without them even more people would commit immoral acts, whether that be murder, stealing, rape, etc.
While 100% reduced gun related deaths would be awesome, that's not what anyone is banking on really when they want to push stricter gun control laws...just a significant reduction of some sort. It's more difficult to perform here because of the 2nd amendment and the sheer amount of guns that exist, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't work on it in some manner (including stuff that on the side affects it like legalizing marijuana reducing violent crime).
Thing is, a lot of violent crime is committed in the heat of the moment, and a lot of would be criminals are lazy to an extent - they won't go through with something all the way if the work required to get there is too high. Automatics are already very difficult/expensive to acquire here, imagine if semi-autos were as well - sure a group of criminals would still acquire them and kill people, but it'd be a substantially smaller amount than current. Restricting people to stuff like small firearms would substantially reduce the amount events like this would happen since stuff like pistols can't exactly easily injure/kill 500+ people in an extremely short time frame. Maybe it wouldn't have curbed this event in particular, but it could have helped curb other events this year or last year, etc. You just have to make acquiring something such an expensive/difficult task that most people get lazy and give up on doing it, or if they do still go through with a crime they aren't as well equipped.
Australia implemented a bunch of measures after Port Arthur that helped lead to a reduction of ~60% in gun related homicide and (sometimes forgotten in gun control arguments) suicide. That's not 100% but that's a lot. ~11,686 people have been reported to die from guns this year alone in the US, if we had a 60% reduction in gun related deaths then 7,120 people would still be alive right now - and that's not including the curbing of our annual ~22,000 gun related suicides.
I'm not saying we can up and go do exactly what Australia did, I don't think the US could ever implement the type of stuff Australia did wholesale especially with the sheer amount of guns we have (they spent like half a billion to buy and destroy like 600k guns and we like 5 times that amount), but I think it highlights how foolish that argument is as strong gun control laws *very objectively* curb gun related homicide & suicide on a significant scale considering other countries with stronger gun control laws have nowhere near this level of problem .
Even if we could put forward laws that would reduce gun related death by even just 20-25% and make mass shootings significantly more difficult, it'd be great for the country.
Anyways, this was pretty depressing to find out about last night and I hope those posting here who have family or friends in the area wind up not being affected by this. :c