To be honest terror gonna terror. But really it's such a rare occurrence in the first place it may actually be worse off to give such a shit as we do to freeze our political situation and allow the terror groups - or any individual - have such command of society by a gruesome act or even shift the focus of the discussion to something irrelevant. I'm not saying to be entirely dismissive of it, but from a statistical stand-point mass-shootings like at Orlando (if we're allowing ourselves to derail the thread to that by proxy) is a very, very rare occurrence; floating at just about 1%.
You could try to clamp down on gun traffic, but if a terrorist was determined they'd still get armed. It's all really a delaying tactic that'll slow them down. And if the authorities are going to be as cautiously disinterested in actively catching suspects before they act as they were with the Orlando shooting: then the longer window it'll take for a terrorist or a determinedly psychologically broken individual to get armed may not be acted on all the same.
That said, that 1% or less than 1% has somehow shifted the focus of the discussion to that far greater issue, and taking away guns is really not going to be the best way to handle that to be honest. It's an easy solution that allow politicians - if they get it to happen - to claim a victory to their name so they can try to passingly claim immortality as a "great legislator" who brought "sweeping change". We really need to be looking into the cause of violence in general, not the tool. Take away the tool, someone else will just use something else. Because, do we really need this when it's all said and done?
You could try to clamp down on gun traffic, but if a terrorist was determined they'd still get armed. It's all really a delaying tactic that'll slow them down. And if the authorities are going to be as cautiously disinterested in actively catching suspects before they act as they were with the Orlando shooting: then the longer window it'll take for a terrorist or a determinedly psychologically broken individual to get armed may not be acted on all the same.
That said, that 1% or less than 1% has somehow shifted the focus of the discussion to that far greater issue, and taking away guns is really not going to be the best way to handle that to be honest. It's an easy solution that allow politicians - if they get it to happen - to claim a victory to their name so they can try to passingly claim immortality as a "great legislator" who brought "sweeping change". We really need to be looking into the cause of violence in general, not the tool. Take away the tool, someone else will just use something else. Because, do we really need this when it's all said and done?
