If so, then I think you are both wrong.
One of the arguments often put forward by those who advocate "the right to bear arms" (most people on this board basically) is that "guns don't kill people. People kill people. Guns are just tools." That is 100% correct, but the argument cuts both ways. If that is true, it follows logically that the level of gun control in a particular locality matters very little compared to the relative willingness of people to pull triggers. Empirically you can see that as well. Britain has some of the most draconian gun-control laws in the world, and yet this is the third of these mass shootings in the past twenty years. Conversely, the US has much less gun control, and you have had even more of these events (although you are a larger and more populous country).
The obvious conclusion is that as far as crazies going on the rampage is concerned, the level of gun control doesn't matter very much. If it is high it doesn't encourage them, and if it is low it certainly does not deter them. It is simply invalid to use tragedies like this to promote the right of Americans to bear arms, especially when the event occured in another country with a different history and a different culture.
In the same way, that cultural and historical difference means that US gun-control lobbyists are also on shaky ground. There's no evidence that British style gun control laws would work exactly the same in America as they do in Britain. In fact I think I could guarantee that they wouldn't.
If you believe that Americans today have the right and indeed the duty to bear arms, that is a perfectly valid argument and a very defendable interpretation of the constitution. If you think that it is wrong for private citizens to own and use guns, that is also a valid argument, (but shakier when it comes to the constitution). Neither side has any need to look at what happens in the UK to make their arguments, and indeed it is a waste of time to do so, because the situation in the two countries is not the same.
My own personal viewpoint is that there will be now more calls to tighten the gun control laws in the UK. I think such controls will have zero impact on preventing tragedies like this and will instead do a lot of actual harm, including increasing the amount of violent crime. I intend to argue these points with my countrymen, but not just now. Everyone is emotional at the moment.
Vanders9,
Just for the record, my first sentence expressed sympathy for all concerned in this horrid event. As always, it seems that those killed were decent folks with loved ones left behind. Furthermore, it seems Cumbria is generally rather peaceful, so this event is even more shocking. Neighbors will mourn the loss and then have vague feelings of worry about the strange fellow across the way. It’s a lousy situation.
I agree that any attempt to put draconian gun control laws on the yanks would be:
1) Challenged up to the Supreme Court
2) Ignored
3) Forcefully resisted, if it got to that point
I also agree that the Cumbrian event will be used to tighten UK controls further. If you recall me mentioning the history of UK control, this is part of a pattern. It does not work as loons, criminals, etc will always get them if they are desired, although being an island, you’ve a bit easier time of stemming the flow.
I think what some of us were pointing out is that permitting more people to own them, including concealed carry permits [with appropriate background & safe operator checks] might well encourage even nutters like this chap to stay home. At some point, I suspect he wanted the satisfaction of blowing other people away. Even nutters can reason and if you think it unlikely that you’d barely be able to get one shot off, maybe you just stay home or take a long walk in the woods?
After the community heals as best it can, I wish you luck in persuading your countrymen and women to not over-react. Should you desire, I would guess that there are a lot of fellow freepers who could provide links to useful data and information.
Best to you and the good people of Cumbria.