I noticed that noting was said about enforcing the thousands of gun laws we already have on the books or adopting a zero tolerance for all crimes committed while in the possession of a gun that is backed up by stiff mandatory sentences to be served with no parole.
How many mass shootings would that stop?
You suggesting cops aren't enforcing laws?
Killing people with guns is already illegal. The few we do have, those laws did not stop them.
Blaming the gun for killers is like you blaming your fork for being fat.
So you are think easy access to mass killing guns is a good idea? Easy tends to increase how often something happens. It's easy to eat and get fat, not so easy to lose the weight.
Lets start with this nonsense of "mass killing guns". He had semi-automatic weapons, some of which were converted to automatic. None of the guns he had were easily accessed, were they? In each case, he had to have a background check performed, which he did. In every case, he passed that background check.
Next let's tackle this talking point about mass killings. First, the metric for mass killings is all over the place and there is no set definition. So, people like you will use whatever metric you want to make whatever point you have seemed reasonable, but your points are not reasonable.
Finally, the entire discussion has to be taken in with an eye to the entire context of the incident. In a nation of 100+ million guns, 99% of which are NOT used in any kind of criminal activity, it is nothing more than a coward's knee-jerk reaction to a horrific incident. There are tools Americans use in every day life that kill far more per year than guns.
BTW....the argument that guns are only made to kill whereas other tools are not is not even a valid argument. Any tool can be made to kill, it isn't the use of the tool that matters, but its misuse.
So, unless you are willing to severely curtail the liberties of 200+ million Americans for no gain in security, I suggest you look to the other reasons that we have these kinds of incidents.