He bought the guns legally in Minnesota. Not next door. Im not saying the Fed should not pass gun legislation, similar to what Minnesota already has. Im just pointing out that gun restrictions alone will not end this.

If someone in his mental state can buy a gun legally, that is NOT a strict gun law. We are so blinded by 2A, we have no idea what strict gun ownership laws look like.

Who's responsibility was it to look at his journal and monitor his internet posts? He was over 20 years old. Are we going to give up our 4th Amendment rights? Are we going to give up our 1st Amendment rights? I understand the problem. Im only asking you to think critically about the solutions.

Federal gun restrictions like Minnesota will be a big step. Im all for it. Confiscating all guns will never happen.

We just don't want it to happen -- we like the killing too much. UK, Australia, NZ have all significantly reversed their gun ownership stance since the mid-1990's. They reframed the concept from a right to a privilege to be earned. We have our heads up our 2A asses.

Tell me the difference. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm...

The Feds should adopt this, I agree. Laws on guns alone will lower the incidences and slow the roll. A huge cash infusion into MH Service and the stigmatization of receiving them will go a long, long way to end this. It's something Mike Johnson opposes more than gun control.

In most states, you can not buy a gun without taking a gun safety course, and it requires much more to own a pistol.

9 states, and DC require gun safety courses for gun purchases — 10 out of 51. Not exactly most.

Guns kill. Military style assault weapons are unnecessary. Mentally unstable people should not own them. Full stop.