@1, no clue but we watched as a bunch of elementary students were killed and did nothing don't for a second think last weeks massacre will change anything.

Oh, and if you don't want to be shot by cops stop breaking the law.

More bike lanes that few folks ever use.

@1: waiting till your ilk are dead and buried is probably step one.

"The whole thing is very confusing." No, it is not. It is ONLY confusing if you and other journalists say it is. Please do not tell your readers Donald Trump is confusing. Confusion is exactly what he wants. It is crystal clear: he is a liar and a cheat and a threat to our nation, and he is desperately doing everything he can to avoid accountability for his corrupt ways. Please be clear on this point with readers. Thank you.

@6: my opinion is irrelevant. we've already decided that any crime in America deserves summary execution if police or a civilian with a gun decides they're under threat. so fuck 'em. throw 'em in the pit with the school kids and the suicides and the gang bangers and the defiant women and the toddlers of irresponsible dimwits.

@7: anger, alienation, and masculinity in crisis. easy, cheap access to MSSAs facilitates "solving" those emotions. but you knew that.

really feeling the Presidents Day pride today.

@14
Tsk, tsk, tsk. Slippery Slope Fallacy. We thought you'd have learned by now.
Your argument doesn't stand. Red card; off the field.

point one: I already conceded. was "fuck 'em" not clear enough? that asshole from Roy who tackled the lady motorcyclist on I-5? fuck him. this dirtball, prowling cars and running from the cops? fuck him. the crazy homeless fuck who threatened some lady on a bus on 3rd avenue so she shot him when he followed her off? fuck him. John T Williams, drunkenly showing a cop the knife that was in his hand? fuck him. don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

point two: "...that will patiently and legally acquire the means of mass murder to draw attention to their grievance"?

you're asserting that rampage killers would simply switch to another method at the same rate. on the whole, rampage killers in America don't - there's no need. they pick semi-automatic weapons because they are affordable, easy to acquire and easy to use. for instance, Allen Ivanov. he read the instructions for his MSSA in his car outside the party he attacked in Mukilteo, and hunted down the woman who rejected him, along with others who got in his way.

we've whacked the automatic weapons and ammonia-based fertilizer inanimate-object-moles already. they seem to have stayed whacked.

@16 You are making a ludicrous comparison. Guns are highly efficient killing machines (they are designed that way) while cars are transportation machines so the why and how of making sure they are used properly is going to be different.. Anyhow, cars are highly regulated (from how they are made to who can operate them and where). If guns were as well regulated as cars, then may be we could focus on behavior modification.

#14 How many mass killings with pressure cookers are carried out in other countries with restricted access to guns?

@9 Your question is a valid one but you must understand that as a society we don't want to know.

@6 the Gun Lobby has worked to legislate against gun education, to prevent MDs from asking about firearms in the house from a public health standpoint, and to prevent CDC from researching issues of gun violence. Tobacco and Alcohol wish they had the kind of pull in hiding information/education that firearms get.

@24;

And yet, since the mid 1960's the number of vehicular deaths-per-year in this country has been on a steady decline, due almost entirely to regulations designed to increase the safety of both motor vehicles and the people who operate or ride in them. So, in point-of-fact design is not only relevant but integral. If you make something safer to use the likelihood of misuse (although one would then need to address the argument that, unlike motor vehicles, guns have only one intended purpose, namely, to push a slug of metal through some other substance, most notably, albeit not exclusively, human flesh) will fall as a result.

Seems harsh to shoot someone trying to break into cars.

@22: wow, it's like you're replying to things I didn't write.

again: I conceded your point. anyone who commits a crime deserves to be shot down on the street if they defy the police. they know the risk they're taking by breaking the law. even philando castile broke the law or he wouldn't have been pulled over. I embrace the current legal standard.

your link does not support your claim of a "fairly unanimous opinion". it reaches back to the 1920s for a bombing example.

@24 if design didn't matter you'd able to drive your favorite armoured fighting vehicle to the store but you can't. drats!

As for casualty rates, we'd have to all use guns as often as we use cars for these comparisons to be relevant.

What about the overarmed police?

Instant execution by the police belongs in a police state.

@31
Your logic is impeccable.

Another serious point to consider is that since people have been immigrating continuously to the U.S. for the past 25 years, more immigrants=lower rates of gun homicide.

BAHAHAHAHAAAA, j/k: your logic sucks.