[
So, it suits your purposes to suggest that a shooting incident in a state with gun control proves that gun control doesn't work however, shootings in a state with liberal ownership laws does not mean that lax gun ownership laws makes that state a more dangerous place.
Got it.
The crooks are going to do their bad things no matter what the gun laws are. No gun control law will ever be effective in disarming the bad guys. We saw that today in Paris, didn't we?
The question is do you also disarm the good guys, because at the end of the day they are the only ones that will obey the gun control laws.
Once you disarm the people that would never use a firearm for a crime then you have created potential victims and have taken away the ability of a citizen to defend themselves.
There can be high crime in an area that has lax gun control laws but that is not the norm. For instance, North Dakota with lax gun control laws has about the same population as DC with stringent gun control laws but the violent crime rate in ND is substantially less.
Gun crimes in Florida went down when the state went to a "shall issue" carry permit. Now Florida has about two million concealed weapon permit holders and has fewer gun crimes per capita than it did before the law was passed.
When you take guns away from the law abiding citizens then all you have are potential victims.
Whether a citizen choses to carry a firearm when they can is their own business. If they can and don't and become a victim then that their own fault. However, if the state prevents them from protecting themselves then the state is at fault.