EVAN EL-AMIN — Shutterstock
Presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton spoke with CNN this morning, the day after the worse mass shooting in United States’ history, and called for a ban on the weapon used.
Hillary Clinton on the gun control debate: "We can't fall into the trap that is set up by the gun lobby" https://t.co/EtPsH6o2xj
— CNN This Morning with Kasie Hunt (@CNNThisMorning) June 13, 2016
“I believe strongly that commonsense gun safety reform across our country would make a difference. We know the gunman used a weapon of war to shoot down at least 50 innocent Americans. This is just totally incomprehensible… We can’t fall into the trap that is set up by the gun lobby, that says if you can’t stop every incident, you shouldn’t try to stop any.”
Hey, that’s a good point. The weapon used by the shooter has also been the gun of choice in several recent massacres in the U.S. In Aurora, Colorado, 12 people were killed and 70 wounded. In San Bernardino, 14 and 22. Newtown, Connecticut? 26 and 2.
After Newtown, Congress proposed a ban on the weapon used. It failed 40-60 in the Senate.
If that gun was banned, would this have still happened? Maybe. Would this ban not work in any way? Maybe. Has 17 years of doing literally nothing since Columbine occurred been a particularly effective strategy in curbing this uniquely American epidemic of mass shootings?
Donald Trump, on the other hand, said if people in the club had been armed, things would have been better.
https://twitter.com/AlisynCamerota/status/742335735576039424
Sure, maybe. Or you could try and preemptively disarm the person who wants to commit the crime. Regardless of your politics, that solution would involve zero shots fired.
[H/T Death and Taxes]