"It's always too soon to talk about gun control"

[Morganite]

Why?

No seriously, that's an honest question. Why does removing guns make it all worse? Why will it make people more stressed? Why will it make people more prone to stockpiling and hoarding, and why will it cause more massacres? In a country, I note, that already has 1 mass shooting killing 4 people or more in a single event per day on average.

There are multiple answers to the first question, but a lot of it boils down to "You won't actually be able to remove most of the guns. See also: Prohibition".

Given that, and the noted tendency for mass shooters who don't have a specific target to seek out places where it's illegal to be armed, making everywhere fall into that category is at least *enabling*. Not sure that'd actually result in more rather than just moving them around though.

More stockpiling and hoarding seems like a safe bet, since it keeps happening even without new regulation. I'm not sure I can even call it irrational, given how shit like this keeps happening.

Would those pressure cooker bombs or pipe bombs have had the same ability to kill 59 people and injure nearly 10 times that number?

Bombs (and fire, for that matter) are both very effective at killing people. Which isn't to say that every bomber or arsonist (of murderous intent) will be successful. But as far as I know the Bath School Disaster still hasn't been unseated as the deadliest school massacre in the US, and it used bombs.

Would this *particular* one have been more or less successful with such methods? Impossible to predict. Certain things I've heard argue against his overall competence, but on the other hand he did demonstrate significant industriousness in his preparations, and the "heat of the moment" factor has to be considered too.

There's an idea I find compelling that a lot of really large-scale shooters don't choose guns because they're easier or more effective (both being kind of circumstantial) but because they want to be more directly involved with the killing.

(It should also be said again that if you're serious about reducing gun deaths, you need to stop arguing about mass shootings and look at the grinding mass of individual murders that actually cause the vast majority of gun homicides.)

Why not? It's the tool he used. Why should one not question how he got them, and if there's something that can be done structurally to limit access to guns for loons?

Because it's the wrong end of the stick.

There are millions of guns in the US, and the vast majority of them are never turned against humans. If there's one thing the non-firearm homicide rate in the US should tell you, people are good at finding ways to kill each other. To make real change you need to stop staring at the tools and start watching the hands.

-Morgan.