Wait, here's a good idea!

More clear thinking from the nation's elite editorialists regarding gun laws:

It may be true that no law could have stopped the Pennsylvania school killer. Maybe, though, stricter laws would have given him pause. And, even if his victims could not have been saved, certainly some of the 10,100 people murdered with guns or some of the 477,040 people who were victims of gun violence last year would have been spared.

Of course. Everyone knows that psychotic child-killers always stop to consider the legality of the weapons they're using to butcher innocent little girls before they actually commit the crime.

The sick loser who killed those children would have done the job with a knife, a hammer, a garden rake or a cordless drill if he didn't have a gun. The continued advocacy of victim disarmament more restrictive gun laws represents willful disregard of the experience and empirical data from strict gun-control localities like New York, D.C. and all the other places that have already tried it. The writer above concedes that no law would have stopped the freak in Pennsylvania. Doesn't matter, though. It would make all right-thinkers feel better and allow them to think that they've actually done something.