Quote Originally Posted by bronc_28 View Post
How about this,

Columbine happened during the "Assault weapons ban"
Every one of the guns were purchased legally, at gun shows, which are gaping loopholes in the system. You don't have to produce identification or be subjected to a background check at a gun show. If it's for sale, ANYONE can buy it, no questions asked. Furthermore, that ban wasn't thorough enough. It made it illegal to manufacture assault weapons, but not to own them. AND the guys who sold the kids the Tec-9 did get decent prison time, so there wasn't any major problem with the enforcement of the law. The law itself was just shitty: 1) Still being able to possess an assault weapon kind of defeats the purpose. 2) Even though the girl who bought the kids the other THREE guns intended for them to have them, she wasn't so much as charged with anything, because they were technically still hers. And the "straw purchase" statute doesn't apply to her because she bought them at a gun show. I was trying to keep this short, so I left out some stuff. Bottom line, it's way too easy to buy guns.

Virginia Tech- the assailant used handguns that were fully legal during the Ban
A severely mentally ill man was able to buy handguns on two separate occasions. At least one was from an actual legit dealer--pawn shop--that does background checks. Not sure about the other. Way too easy to buy guns.

My point is you can't un-invent guns, and shy of that, any action taken will just be to make people feel better. I don't think people should be willing to fritter away rights to make people feel better.
I really don't see how you come to that conclusion. There can be substantial changes to gun regulation that wouldn't even affect people who are fit to have them at all. I'd be cool with that, but I would want to affect them, though. No one should have access assault rifles, unless they're actively in law enforcement AND on the clock. Private collections be damned.