Undoubtedly, today's shooting will bring gun control supporters in Washington running to the nearest TV cameras. Many of them will call for laws that wouldn't do a thing to have prevented this tragic attack. Since Alexis had a Texas CHL, he already went through a background check. Apparently he had also secret clearance to the shipyard and was given a military-issued ID card. I'd assume he had to undergo a background check of some sort as well for that, but I'm not certain. Either way, it doesn't look like the background check billthe Senate rejected earlier this year would have done anything to prevent today's events.

The other elephant in the room RKBA supporters are extremely skeptical of the intent of any politician advocating any new gun laws, for a variety of reasons. For one thing, many of the antis are ignorant as a stone when it comes to firearms. Many out there WOULD like to see everyone's guns taken away. There's a strong contingent right here on the DU that feels that way. A couple decades ago, gun control advocates openly floated the idea of civilian disarmament. Though today's gun control movement isn't openly calling for banning or severely restricting most firearms, nobody in the gun community believes gun control supporters when they say "nobody wants to take away your guns." This crowd has long memories. Just look at the New York Safe Act. Its a defacto confiscation scheme for many popular firearms. DiFi's most recent AWB contained similar provisions.

I really don't see an incentive for RKBA supporters to support new gun restrictions. Nobody expects a UBC bill to significantly effect gun crime rates. Also, nobody in the pro RKBA community believes that letting a UBC bill pass will appease the antis one bit. As soon as the next tragedy happens, they'd try to impose harsher restrictions.

So in other words, expect much sound and fury, but at the end of the day, little else.