WhatisausernameYour post is a textbook example of the biased towards "fairness" mentality. In a week, no one will remember this tragedy; if any, this is the only time we'll get a chance to have a serious conversation about the direction gun ownership laws in this country will take. One can discuss and debate the issues all they'd like without getting anything done (as is often the case) and "agreeing to disagree".
Did you not actually read the rest of my post?
Immediately after what you quoted, I said:
mustardoverlordhowever, whether or not it's logical to begin gun control conversations only after tragic events like this (it's not), I think it's still good to have those conversations in the first place.
if anything, gun control is more relevant to issues of like gang violence or inner city homicides, but no one ever wants to talk about that. incidents like this, when a bunch of little kids get killed at once, evoke such a huge emotional response that it makes sense to have the debate now, even though tbh stuff like this is one of the most unavoidable aspects of gun violence.
The only appeal to fairness I was making is ON AN ISSUE TO ISSUE BASIS. There are bound to be shooting incidents where all the gun control in the world wouldn't have helped, but we should avoid that tainting the debate overall. There are obviously situations where gun control would be helpful OVERALL. I said the exact same thing you did, that this is the time to have the debate when everyone is still emotional. Please actually read my posts.
Whatisausernamemustardoverlordif anything though, aside from the possibility of more gun control -> less access to weapons -> no shooting, there's the more realistic possibility of more gun control -> less gun-obsessed culture over time -> less seeking out of firearms -> less gun violence
It's very tempting to pin the blame on abstract issues such as "gun-obsessed culture" to console ourselves with inaction. The simple fact is that the ease of procuring guns (and ammo), the complete lack of weapons training, no enforcement of gun-ownership responsibility and the sheer number of guns out there are explanation enough.
1) I said that the scenario for change you were describing was still possible. I just added another to solidify the argument for gun control further.
2.) I'm not just blaming it on "gun culture" and saying it's unfixable. I'm saying said culture exists BECAUSE OF THE READILY AVAILABLE NATURE OF GUNS, and that it would be reduced if gun control were in place.