The Santa Barbara shooter had legally purchased and registered firearms, and passed prior questioning by the police who saw no danger to himself or others. More gun laws won’t stop the next such shooter, either.
It is eerie how the mental health of the shooter consistently seems to emerge as a key factor in mass shootings such as the rampage by Elliot Rodger, who killed six and wounded 13 on Friday. The shooter had been in therapy since age 8 and police had been warned by his parents to check him out.
Yet few liberals cry for tougher mental health laws compared with demands for tougher gun control. It would surprise these liberals that “right-wing bitter clingers” and even the NRA agree that some people shouldn’t have access to guns — people such as Elliot Rodger.
The question is how to realistically and constitutionally do it. Instead of answering that question, we hear cries for “tougher” laws. But tougher than what?
Last December the Los Angeles Times noted in a report that California had the strictest gun control laws in the country and had received an A- grade in a state-by-state analysis by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence.