Usually it takes a while before actual facts come out about newsworthy events. There's a rush to get out news, any news, as it's breaking. So I waited a few days to see what would come out about the Arapahoe school shooting.
I have a few questions.
Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a DKos group of second amendment supporters who have progressive and liberal values. We don't think that being a liberal means one has to be anti-gun. Some of us are extreme in our second amendment views (no licensing, no restrictions on small arms) and some of us are more moderate (licensing, restrictions on small arms.) Moderate or extreme or somewhere in between, we hold one common belief: more gun control equals lost elections. We don't want a repeat of 1994. We are an inclusive group: if you see the Second Amendment as safeguarding our right to keep and bear arms individually, then come join us in our conversation. If you are against the right to keep and bear arms, come join our conversation. We look forward to seeing you, as long as you engage in a civil discussion.
First, what piece of recently proposed firearm legislation would've prevented this shooting? An assault weapons ban wouldn't cover a pump action shotgun. A universal background check wouldn't have helped (since he passed the background check). A waiting period MIGHT have pushed it off a couple of days, if it was long enough. He bought the shotgun on the 6th and opened fire on the 13th. The capacity based magazine ban, which Colorado has, didn't affect the shooter due to the type of firearm he has.
Secondly, an armed sheriff's deputy confronted the shooter, along with an unarmed security guard. This was the major reason why the shooter stopped shooting after only 80 seconds. Doesn't this help make the case for having an armed responder on site for these kinds of situations?
Thirdly, are there any laws out there which would prevent him from making the Molotov cocktails?
But my overriding question is this: how could this shooting have been prevented?