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

[hazard]

Hazard, what planet are you from?

Earth. Looking at the rest of your post, clearly a better corner of it than yours.

What can I say, the Netherlands may have their problems but we're pretty awesome generally speaking.

First of all, do you honestly expect me to take time away from my job to organize something like that?  Are you fucking stoned?  That bullshit is for people that either have too much time on their hands, or they got nothing left to lose.  I'm working 10 to 12 hour overnight shifts and I'm just barely digging myself out of a hole.  I don't even make $25k/year here, and that's busting my ass working anywhere between 50 to 60 hours a week!

Well, I'm sorry to say, but that sounds to me like your congresscritter and your state delegate need to be told to move their asses and get you a decent working wage if you can work 60 hour weeks and not get out of your hole.

So yes, I did expect you to have enough time on your hands to be politically active even with a fulltime job and no, I don't do drugs. I mean, being politically active and an informed voter takes time, surely a nation as democratic as the USA would ensure that its enfranchised public has the opportunity to participate meaningfully in the political process.

[The answer to that is, of course, a resounding no. Because the USA is the nation of high ideals and not following up on those high ideals.]

As for why most Americans won't hand over their assault rifles or everything else?  You've got to be kidding, right?

The original intent of the 2nd Amendment was so that everyone could defend themselves from their own government if needs be.  What you are asking of us is to remove and essential final check on the power of the Federal Government.  Don't argue about the semantics of "What are a bunch of jon does going to do against trained soldiers?"  That's not how it works.  Ideally the Military is supposed to recognize where the Federal government has gone too far and either stand aside or even assist in a revolution.

That is not going to be given up.  Not ever.

You clearly have not carefully read the Second Amendment. It doesn't speak of the people being able to protect themselves, it speaks of a well regulated militia protecting a State. In fact, let me quote the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States in full:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Let us unpack that, shall we? At the time of writing a State would be, well, a State of the United States of America, be it Connecticut, Georgia, either of the Carolina's, Rhode Island or those I'm forgetting. It is presumed that to ensure their security they will be operating a well regulated Militia of some sort. And because the Constitution of the United States defines the rights and privileges of the federal government all this says is that the federal government cannot pass or enforce gun laws restricting access to guns.

In that regard it's a major restriction on the federal government, as it prevents the federal government from centralizing gun ownership under its own control and denying States access to guns that could be used to tell the federal government to get lost. That check? It's not the people's, it's the States'.

However, as the Constitution does not define the restrictions specific to the various states in the United States except by saying 'everything not defined as a right of the federal government is a matter the states and people need to deal with,' this means that state governments and lower level governments can pass whatever gun control laws they wish without running into the Second Amendment. In other words, the states need to start regulating their militias. Or, you know, handle gun control laws sanely.

And that's not even getting into the breach of the Second Amendment that is the ATF law enforcement agency. I mean, a federal level enforcement bureau for gun laws?

As for your belief that a better mental health system won't severely curb this issue?  I think you're wrong.

No matter what their beliefs, no matter how they rationalized their actions, every one of these people were completely raving mad.  Make mental health a priority and you will catch the vast majority of these people before they can ever do any lasting harm.

The problem is that, well, I'll let you continue.

ETA:

Rob, what that study fails to show is HOW that money is spent on mental health.  I'm pretty sure if you compared the system in use here in the USA to that of other countries, you'd probably see a very different picture.

Your mental health culture is a mess. Your mental health culture is structurally a mess, and it's supported in remaining this mess by the USA's own cultural attitudes. The shooters may have been crazy, the shooters may have been insane. But by your own laws they cannot be prevented from gaining access to guns, and knowing the USA those people who would be most at risk of becoming mass shooters would be ignored by whatever mental health system would be developed in favour of politically more advantageous mental health issues.