No one seems to want to understand why the kid decided to shoot other kids, what drove them to it, and how we fix that issue. That person get's stamped as a crazy person and then gun control is flagged around for the next two weeks. Reactionary kids hold marches and parades, bright-eyed and fierce, full of their own impassioned beliefs and convictions as most kids are.
I'm no psychologist, but when you sit on it for a few, why is the "gun" focused on so much in these scenarios? I think it's the least important feature. The real problem is why did the kid decide to shoot other kids? What drove him to it. Mental illness? That's often cited as an excuse and I'm sure the pharmaceuticals would agree, but plenty of other kids suffer from the same thing, but they don't go around shooting or stabbing or killing people singly or in mass. I think we assume the person must be crazy because they did a crazy thing, but crazy things are often quite rational things lacking context.
One of my thoughts was that while I don't condone the actions or reactions of the shooter, I don't believe the shooter is always a monster or scumbag, but could have been, himself, the victim of months or years of abuse that for whatever reason went unchallenged to the point where they were pushed over the edge. After the shooting you will get the tears and the sympathy for the victims and the general hatred of the shooter, but I don't think this is honest or fair because we simply don't know the situation. In fact, the shooter could have been the victim of bullies who maybe didn't use excessive physical force, but could have caused a great deal of emotional and psychological carnage in the cruel and sometimes vicious way kids can. The very same kids who are crying and are shell-shocked could have been a part of that abuse. Have you ever had to deal with an a-hole who refused to stop being one until you punched him in the face, and then he's shocked and crying and calling for help because you hurt him? After months or years of their crap, you retaliate and now you are in trouble because you responded with visible, physical force to abuse that has been scarring you for such a long time?
This abuse is magnified when the adults and/or the people of last resort that such a child is supposed to turn to are either unsympathetic or unresponsive. Plenty of kids react violently under situations less intense than this. Plenty of adults do, as well. But what bridges the gap between these actions and a kid shooting up his school? Out of all the kids who suffer similar conditions or even worse conditions, why do these very, very few decide to grab a gun and shoot people? Why don't we talk about the ones who commit suicide instead, or resort to something as hideous?
It's my belief that the politics of gun control has seized upon and made a giant straw man of child shooters. I am no conservative and I am no liberal and I'm disgusted by people who approach situations from either of those angles. I simply think of the situation and say...why aren't we talking about the social and psychological conditions that would obviously be the reason for these shootings. How is removing the guns the best thing to focus on in school shootings rather than solving the sociological sewage that underwrites it? What's the real weapon here? What's really hurting these kids, our people, our country? Do guns whisper murder into the ears of kids at night? Are they, despite all appearances, as sentient as they are diabolical?
This is not a pro-gun argument. It's really about the kid that was affected. The gun argument effectively ignores the kids. Uses them and the tragedy and, if you must insist on it, both sides of the political aisle use this tragedy to their own ends while both claim to protecting some facet of sacrosanct public safety, security, and/or rights. I know this is the cheesiest line from over a decade ago, but in this case where everyone claims to be thinking about the kids...think about the kids.