It’s a complicated argument particularly since by the US constitution all citizens have a right of firearms ownership. Changing that would be a major political issue.
states and the US have enacted from time to time “bans” and limitations but they either don’t actually work as they focus on a specific “scary weapon” or are unconstitutional.
Mass shooting events account for less than 5% of gun crime. How events are counted and considered is debated by sources with some groups creating numbers that boggle the mind. The FBI for example counts 28 mass shooting events in 2019. The advocacy group Gun Violence Archive claims 417, well USA Today counted 41. So dramatically different numbers from different sources who set criteria differently. For example some count domestic homicides where the FBI doesn’t.
Farther the criteria for this is skewed by another factor often overlooked. Rather US has more civilians with weapons than other nations. As a result the more common equivalent would be the Mass stabbing or vehicular rampage. The fact of availability skews the statistics.
Ahhh... the old Second Amendment argument, it gets old, very old.
Now I’m just a dumb Aussie, a dumb Skippy, but if I remember properly the oft quoted excuse, the Second Amendment dates back to 1791, correct?
And if I’m correct, pistols and rifles from that time were all single shot, they took a $hit load of time to load, fire, and a $hit load of time to reload, true? They were not capable of causing or performing ‘mass’ shootings.
If Americans are so wedded to the ideals of the 2nd Amendment maybe they should trade in all of their automatic and semi automatic weapons for those single shot weapons of 1791.
Failing that, there is the 2nd amendment itself, Americans scream out “You can’t change 2nd Amendment!!” Yes you can, it’s an amendment, amend the bloody amendment.
But the truth is very simple, Americans don’t need guns for reasons given back in 1791, the truth is they ‘like’ they ‘want’ guns.