Look, how do you keep people who develop mental issues away from vehicles? How do you stop them from hurting/killing people?
At the moment its not possible to keep people completely safe from motor vehicle mishaps nor from those who wish to use their vehicles as weapons.
However, regulation, restrictions and enforcement have dramatically decreased deaths and accidents from motor vehicle incidents over the last 6 decades. As we move to autonomous vehicles over the next decades, the rate of accidents will decrease exponentially. (Already accident prevention features, that are the precursors to complete automation are having this affect) And the opportunity to turn a vehicle into a weapon or suicide vehicle will diminish to near zero.
Can you anticipate the same kinds of changes with fire arms?
point to examples where increased regulation and restrictions have had the same affect on firearms deaths and injuries... Most dramatically in other countries, like Australia. But even within the US there are examples where improvement in the deaths and injuries per capita have been achieved ... New York has demonstrated such efficacy as Freeman noted..
Perfection cannot be achieved. But that should not be an excuse to attempt to make improvements.
Vegas: how do you know he had mental issues? What was his motive?
Does a paragon of mental health do what he did?
Is his motive really as relevant as his ability to act on his motivations? Whatever they were?
If he were a muslim versus a white nationalist versus just a nutter .... is the impact any different? He was just an old white guy, with lots of guns and ammo. Sure he could have been a disaffected Muslim, or an aggrieved nazi... But what mass shooters all have in common are lots of guns and ammo. No matter what their motivations, restricting their access would at least mitigate the end result.
Is there really a defense that says we shouldn't make ownership of guns and ammo more restrictive in order to reduce potential harm? That is a defense that is more than, "It would inconvenience gun owners to have to be held to the same kind of responsibilities that they have when owning and operating a motor vehicle?
I'm not jailing them. So, put that in your crack pipe and smoke it
You said ...
Institutionalize those with violent mental issues
So describe the difference between the two. Are those you institutionalize" free to go about their daily activities? Work, recreation etc?
This is a large part of what you suggested was a remedy so you should have thought this through.
BTW, a comprehensive mental health program would require a tremendous investment in socialized delivery of this medical service. Its probably a great idea, as long as it isn't just warehousing or jailing.
Strikes me that you, being a socialist, don't really understand "personal responsibility."
You also don't understand the United States, guns, or life in general.
I know that you haven't got any answers to reducing the carnage from gun violence. Nor has anyone else who uses the 2nd amendment and the US way of life as an excuse for acceptance of the continued carnage. And you do accept the level of violence don't you?
I know that the right to vote is enshrined in the Constitution but you, and many conservatives, have no problem placing restrictions and regulations on how people may register and vote.
But gun ownership? Any attempt to regulate, restrict and drive personal responsibility in order to reduce the damage from guns is met with stubborn unthinking resistance.
Meanwhile, the mass shootings continue and the daily domestic violence continues and more ...
At some point this will
change, as society changes and tires of accepting the continued toll. Its a shame that there will be many more events like Vegas and
Charleston before the majority come to realize that the notion that continuing the current policies dooms thousands more to die..