Again, I never said guns aren’t dangerous. I never said guns aren’t a problem. The problem with the counterarguments to confiscating guns in extreme cases is most of the time all they say is that guns should be banned or more laws are needed. But people who say this don’t realize that there are already a fuck ton of laws in place for gun control. People who say this also usually don’t have any sort of plan beyond “we need more laws.” Well, criminals are going to break the laws to obtain guns regardless of whether or not they are banned. You can roll your eyes at that because you’ve heard it a million times, but it’s the fucking truth. The people who did this were organized criminals. The average gun owner is not going to do this.

Yes, guns make killing easier, I’ll admit that. But, for the sake of that argument, let’s say we live in a reality where the only thing different is that guns are banned, period. They exist, but citizens cannot by law own them. I guarantee you this disaster still would’ve happened. The criminals still would’ve acquired guns because they operate outside the law. If they’re going to murder someone, owning a couple guns is of no consequence to them. Who or what would you blame then? What if, instead we lived in a reality where guns didn’t exist and they used knives?

So, guns by themselves are not the problem. I’d argue it’s the price we pay for living in a free country. The freedom of speech and the freedom to express your views is powerful and perhaps comes at a price. There will be people who disagree with you and willing to take that to the extremes. That doesn’t make what they did right and I hate this tragedy just as much as you do.

In the end, my main point wasn’t that knives can kill thus we don’t need gun control, it was to point out the flaw in thinking that stricter gun control will actually accomplish anything. We already have a lot of gun control. As long as guns exist, as long as anything that can kill exists, we will always have problems.