And since everyday around 50 million people in the US use their guns responsibly it might behoove others not to knee jerk react to the few who don't and want to find ways to label the rest - let alone wasting time on frivolous laws that contribute nothing to stopping the next killer to use one tool over another.
Assault weapon ban? Silly when you look at it. We have more than enough sensible gun laws that are not enforced because people don't want to pony up the money for more enforcement officers/equipment/prosecutors/etc. So what do we do when someone shoots someone else (already illegal in a number of ways - assault is illegal, killing is, using a gun is more illegal than harming people other ways, etc).
You cannot, and will not, legislate people into morality. A few will always go their own way so banning things we know won't work. Restricting ownership to those not criminally inclined by checking their history is fine, but not all people will go to buy a gun after they have done something to exclude them (in other words, it is not a perfect system to accomplish that goal).
I am all for keeping the guns out of the hands of that less than 1%.
Question is - why do so many ONLY want the 1% of society (the government and the wealthy) to be allowed to own guns? Maybe because they see us lowly citizens as below others in society that have a job with the government. Which puts the government above the people (and the wealthy, of course, will have armed protection if they want it by hiring others that we tell them are allowed to own guns).
Me? I am for the 99%. Not so sure about others though and why they rush to promote the 1%.