[@ErsatzEmperor]

This was not an issue of weapon of choice, a gun, but motives, which were deeply ideological and political. As details are coming out, this mass shooter was an avid atheist supporter who reportedly dehumanized people who held a belief in God and had [i]actual[/i], [i]proven[/i] ties to the Radical Left. Of this there is not even a debate, not as with Paddock.

Why are American shootings so politicized and public? Quite simply because there is a continued and ongoing effort to have "tighter gun control". Why was "gun control" not pushed when James Hodgkinson attempted to kill near half of the American Senate? Why is Paddock's attack a subject of "banning bump stocks" when evidence can even suggest he had converted, automatic weapons? Why are we not advocating "tighter truck control" after Sayfullo Saipov used a truck to mowdown a bunch of bicyclists?

There is a narrative here that crops up every time. People want the "feels good" solution of banning guns or having "better laws", but for a nation with as many firearms as it has, the United States has relatively low weapons crime. The [i]real[/i] issue is the motive and the people adhering to it. Being dismissive to tragedy and poking fun at it is well worth the condemnation it receives as part of this.