That's more than in countries with more restrictive gun laws. And since you're splitting hairs, allow me to do the same. First of all, it was not 300 mil, it was between 280 and 290 at the time. Second, you're only counting deaths. Quite a few people survived Columbine, for example, but not all unscathed.
OK, say 11 dead out of 280000. And maybe 3-4 mutilated. Still not outrageous, since much more people die or get hurt for life by car accidents or eating the wrong food. We all die in the end, and getting your brains blown out mightn't be worse than spending the last decades of your life in a "senior home" in your own secretions. Not in my humble opinion. Why must we be "protected" so that we go through life halfly suffocated? Because that's how I feel about laws that were made on me without asking me about my opinion about them.
You're splitting hairs. Their targets were innocent.
How could I but "split hairs"? How do you know they were? Didn't anyone of them know their killers before?
But they are NOT happening in Switzerland.
No, interesting isn't it, because until 2000 guns were totally free in Switzerland, like in Vermont. The guns were easier to get hold of than in most American states. So the guns themselves can't be blamed. Might we guess that this was due to Switzerland being a welfare state, and pretty much like Sweden, and the shootings in the US are due to the country and mentality itself being more brutal? But of course Swedish politicians and reporters wouldn't drag up Switzerland, because they
want the Swedish people to believe that guns in themselves are evil, and it's much easier throwing shit on the US than on Switzerland, because the US do things that Sweden and Switzerland aren't able to or daren't do and thus Swedish hypocrite politicians and reporters just
have to throw shit on the US.
