The Muslim attackers in San Bernardino left behind more than a dozen bombs in their home, they didn't seem to mind that constructing such devices is strictly against the law.

Their rifles were obtained by a third party, this is called a straw purchase by Federal law. It is a felony. So is murder.

So exactly which laws do you think they would have obeyed?

Perhaps Sharia law?

France prohibits ownership of automatic rifles, that didn't really help the hundreds of dead and wounded.

What we are left with is the understanding that governments cannot stop all criminal and terrorist attacks regardless of the laws in place.
The only logical conclusion is that citizens must take a more proactive role in self defense. There is strong evidence that many are already doing that and it seems to be a growing trend.

Whatever your thoughts on the meaning of the Second Amendment (the framer's intentions) -- the cat's been out of the proverbial bag for decades. There are more guns than people in the US. Our death-by-firearms statistics are completely out of whack with other industrialized nations. An altercation between two people that would result in a shouting match or fistfight in Japan, Australia, Germany (insert advanced democracy) can easily turn into a gun-crime in the US. But, it is what it is, as they say. You can't confiscate your way out of this.

The only stop-gap measures I can see common sense dictating are:

1) Making it harder for the wrong people to obtain guns (thorough background checks, mental health checks ...) and only allowing sales through licensed dealers.

2) Stiff, mandatory sentences for gun crimes.

As much the media likes to bleed-lead stories of mass shootings and assault weapons, by far most people in the US who are victims of gun violence are killed by simple handguns in suicide, bar fights, drunk tough guys, petty street crime and domestic violence.

And as much as it pains this "progressive" to say it, sometimes the only real solution to a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. But better that we had no guns to begin with.

Oh, and radical Islam is one of the greatest threats facing Western civilization today.

If you ever want to look at the "real" stats that reflect that firearms prohibition and related State and Firearms laws aren't working just look at the Cartel related Murders by firearms in U.S. Border Cities with Mexico.

So in essence, more laws will only further restrict the law abiding people who chose to obey them.

The criminal element, by nature, lives by their own lawlessness.

Nope, better we DIDNT have bad people to begin with. But that's as steeped in fantasy as much as making guns illegal to eliminate gun violence.

It's tough to be "preogressive" when there's a whole slew of people in the world that want to live like it's 800+ years ago.

You're implying that stricter gun laws do not lead to fewer gun crimes. That's simply not the case. The states with the strictest gun laws have fewer gun deaths. Gun control by state: Tougher laws mean fewer deaths.

There is a clear, undeniable linear link between gun ownership and gun deaths, both at the state level and at the nation level. https://cdn3.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/V2t...p%20states.png

http://26t4l93f9dhe439yxm286lpv.wpen...10/Graph-1.png

You mention California twice. They rank fairly high in gun control and fairly low in gun crime.

As far as vehicular homicide, if you read my post again (carefully) you'll note that I said that most people who are killed by guns are mostly likely to die by handguns in simple domestic disuptes, suicide, theft ... You stated that more people are killed by "vehicular homicide." That is ridiculous, and your own link proves it. Maybe you meant "vehicular deaths," as opposed to people killing people with cars.

Finally, if the "criminal element lives by their own lawnessless," what, exactly, is the point of having any laws?

PS: I actually agree with you that, at this point, we do need more "good guys with guns." The problem is executing that policy.

Why would it be better not to have people? Who'd do the internet debating?

I'm not "preogressive" exactly.

That's why we have to eliminate them.

I specially said bad people.

I'm perfectly capable of debating good people on the internet. I'm debating you, aren't I?

Well, that's good. Because the people that like to identify themselves the most with a certain affiliation can often be the most full of contradiction and hypocrisy. Regardless of leaning.

I often times put things in quotes to imply sarcasm, facetiousness, irony, etc. So I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not really that "progressive"

The statistics and articles you provided in your next post are very much out of touch with reality.
Absent the death tolls in four major us cities due to gang violence, the us has about the same murder rate as Belgium.
We know exactly where the problem is, but for whatever reason it isn't going to be fixed. A quick look at actual DOJ statistics will allow the answer to jump right out for you. Pop culture articles miss the point.
Here is a hint: http://heyjackass.com/

Instead of an agenda at Slate, take a look at reality.
In the last two decades, gun ownership is much higher and the murder rate has been cut by half. Their is however a small demographic with an extremely high murder rate and a persistent culture of violence. Perhaps three percent of our population is actually responsible for the majority of our violence.

As well as a few other Western style nations I believe. Which when you extract what you mention, THEN factor in how many guns there are in the U.S. it can add an additional level complexity to an argument.

And for those that like to repeatedly scream the number of gun deaths per year, I agree, it's an appalling number.

However, REMOVE specifically suicides from that TOTAL number.

What? Do people think if they DIDNT have access to a gun they WOULDNT have committed suicide? Look at the numbers of people that kill themselves with drugs/medication per year. Doesn't matter if it's illegal narcosis or legal/prescription.

Interesting stats. And gang-related crime does makes up a huge percent of gun deaths. But what to do about it?