A maniac and a gun(even though, if they don't have guns, they use bombs, cars, etc), but since we're talking about shootings, a maniac and a gun. There's also a single factor that is alike in all drownings: water and a person who drowns.(You think banning swimming pools or even water is the way to prevent drownings, because the "guilty" is the water?) There's another single factor common to motorvehicle accidents: motorvehicles. You think it is a good idea to ban cars, because it is the cars's fault?
I have not said we should ban guns. The contingencies associated with the right and appropriate regulations are another story. But, guns are here and here to stay. It’s up to republicans to figure out how to live with them safely. Rick Scott is a Republican and he just proposed a bunch of laws that limit people’s ability to get guns. That’s great. Is he banning guns? Now to swimming pools and automobiles bs guns. What happened when Tylenol had a scare in the 1970s and killed some people? We got laws that said bottles must be tamper proof. What about when people were flying out of windshields in the 1960s and car accident fatalities were higher than ever? We got safety standards. Water is an interesting one because there is not an epidemic of drownings I know of. What’s the ratio of pools to drownings, or daily swimmers in any body of water to drownings?
Regulations and limits on gun ownership and commerce have been increased over the years, and these shootings still happend. The same thing with the countries that have banned guns. Here in Brazil it is virtually impossible to get a permit to carry a gun, but people die being shot by criminals with all types of "banned guns" every single day. Even democrats admit that no law or regulation would have prevented these shootings. And Europe have been dying like sheep in each of the attacks that they had, despite all their regulations. So we're back to the same thing: banning guns don't work, because absolutely nothing, much less some law, stops maniacs from doing what maniacs do. Not only that, it makes it worse, because people who respect the law are defenseless and the maniacs know that and take advantadge of it. Tampered proof bottles have no evidence of being effective. I'm not saying they aren't, but "some people killed" is not enough to pass regulations. If you provide me evidence that there was a significant number of people that died taking their medicine specifically because of tampering of bottles and then show me that after the regulation the numbers of deaths by this very cause has significantly reduced, then I'll believe you. But I doubt that you have that study, since most stupid regulations such as these just come out of nowhere imposing costs in business without actually having any benefit, simply as a result of some dumb sensationalist media crusade. From what I read, 7 people died. Tylenol took a big hit because of this, so to save it's skin, it would have taken measures to garanty the safety to it's consumers in order to stop losing money, as it did. Otherwise it would go broke because other companies would do this and draw the costumers away from the original tylenol. Finally I'm pretty sure the "tylenol deaths" weren't an epidemie too, but you still defend regulation over it. By the same token, why should drownings only be regulated if they are at epidemic levels? The mere fact that people die from it should be enough, as was the case with tylenol. You lack consistency in your arguments.
The Tylenol murders is a good example of recognizing a dangerous liability and taking effective steps to ensure public safety. https://www.snopes.com/horrors/poison/tylenol.asp
The public safety is guaranteed by the companies own interest of not having it's clients die from it's products, because if it keeps happening the company goes broke. But most important: Why do you keep ignoring everything you can't argue against and stop trying to deviate from the subject? Oh wait... I just answered my own question: Because you can't argue against it.
People. I guess that is why your pro-abortion ilk kill thousands a day- to reduce the number of potential criminals. Good job. NOT.