All hope is lost. DU gun debate shows that America isn't ready for real reform.

[HereSince1628]

28. I think intentionally colorful language is often inflammatory for combustible topics.

It conflates risks across broad categories whose members rightfully feel they are being suspected to be guilty by an association that is extremely tenuous.

Moreover people tend to look at risk only in a way that supports their position.

Most of the mass-shootings of late are suicides associated with multiple homicides.

Most mentally ill aren't suicidal and most of those suicidal aren't psychotic even if 90 percent of suicides are associated with a mental illness (most usually a condition associated with depression which isn't a psychosis). 17,000 gun suicides out of 63 million people rounds off to about .03% of the mentally ill in the US.

Most legal gun owners aren't suicidal although almost all the 17,000 annual suicides by gun guns are done with guns owned legally by someone in the household, usually them self. If just for the sake of argument we look at the 17,000 gun suicides compared to the population of legal gun owners, the risk of any randomly considered gun owner being associated with a gun suicide in their household is about .02%.

Similarly if we accept that 92% of the mass shooters since 1981 showed ex post facto recognized signs (about 50%) or had diagnoses of diagnoses any previous mental illness (about 49%) as typical, and assign that rate to the 6 mass shooters of 2012 that is a risk of 0.0004% of mass shooting for any randomly drawn mentally ill person in the United States.

Neither gun owners or the mentally ill want to be considered risks by association with a class which actually has such small relationships.