Again, I'm not at all an expert, so I'm happy for you to correct me, but I thought the Las Vegas shooter and the Church-shooter in Charleston bought their guns legally? I thought neither of them raised red flags, and so would have been deemed 'peaceful people' until they weren't.
I'm not at all saying I have the solution to this incredibly complex problem, and I'm sure that you're aware that the US has a reputation around the world for being 'gun crazy' but I would have thought that banning all guns except single shot rifles would at least help with all the shootings and massacres. Obviously the black market would need to be stamped out, and again, it might all be too complex for the US to resolve, but I guess my overall point is that I think it's entirely practical for someone in the US to be nervous about guns, because lots of people seem to get shot. Maybe the data is wrong, but at least from a PR point of view, my half-brother and half-sister in Australia go to school without ever having to worry about a shooter. I just don't think kids in the US can say the same... it's hard not to blame the guns in that comparison.
"the Las Vegas shooter and the Church-shooter in Charleston bought their guns legally?"
They very well could in a private sale anyway as this article confirms. Since they can get this in a black market and anyone with serious mental issues can as well, why not just legalize it all and make it a wild west again? Let's remove speeding laws and allow everyone drive to 100 or as far as their odometer, since a few will keep breaking the law anyway. The law can't stop it from happening. That's the argument some make.
Very insightful reading this thread all the same.
This is why I think we need 15 billion guns... two for each person. Then we'll all be safe.
You're building a strawman argument and making an error in reasoning by appealing to authority. That is not the argument I made, and legality does not have rational or moral aughority.
Consider speed limits, as you asserted. When the natural rate of traffic flow as determined by the drivers on the road exceeds an arbitrary government limit, they are all "criminals," but no crime was committed. No harm to life, liberty, or property is an inherent or necessary consequence of driving 70 MPH in a 65 MPH zone. It is not automatically reckless endangerment, aggression, or any other form of clear and present danger. Just move to the outside lane and let faster traffic pass you.
When people buy and sell guns without following arbitrary government restrictions, they are "criminals," again despite the absence of real crime. If you don't like guns, don't buy them. It's that simple.
Using what-if scenarios is a poor way to establish norms in society and using government guns to impose your opinions on others is far from a peaceful amd rational position.