fox files

Too often, it seems — especially when it comes to mass shootings — anti-gunners are quick to use only the end results of such tragic events to justify the need for (you guessed it!) MORE gun control.

Case in point: the latest mass shooting at the Henry Pratt Company in Aurora, Illinois, last Friday.

According to the Washington Post, the suspect, who “fatally shot five people and wounded five officers at an Illinois warehouse Friday, severely beat a woman years ago in a domestic violence incident that turned him into a felon — and should have kept him from buying a gun.”

Dr. John R. Lott, (I’ve read every book he has penned) author of More Guns, Less Crime, founder of the Crime Prevention Research Center and staunch gun-rights advocate, recently penned an article on the incident over at Town-hall. He wrote: “Twice, background checks failed to catch the criminal background of killer Gary Martin. Even worse, the errors that occurred in Illinois were a result of dramatic cuts in funding for background checks.”

“But, as usual, gun-control advocates called for more background checks before the facts of the case were even known,” he added.

Indeed, it at least appears that those individuals who seek to infringe upon the rights of law-abiding citizens only look at the end results of such a tragedy … and not what led up to it.

Don’t misconstrue my point here.

At the end of the day, Martin, who began shooting at fellow employees “after he was told he was being fired,” per the Washington Post, is SOLELY responsible for his heinous actions. But I think it’s a mistake to look only at the aftermath of a critical incident when it comes to calling for sweeping change.

After all, as Dr. Lott so aptly noted, “The proposed gun control laws aren’t addressing the problems we face.”

So why aren’t we looking at what other factors are at play?

Dr. Lott noted that, “undoubtedly, the first two mistaken [background] checks were due to human error. But the fault lies with Illinois. The media has made much of the fact that, after the third check, police didn’t follow through and make sure that Martin’s illegally obtained gun was taken away from him. But this isn’t due to any loophole in the law. Rather, it was a politically created problem. The automatic push for the universal background checks makes little sense, as it uses the same federal NICS system. If the problem is human error, why not concentrate on fixing that issue?”

Why aren’t we looking at the fact that Martin shouldn’t have had a gun in the first place?

Why aren’t we looking at the fact that this terrible event transpired in yet another “gun-free” zone?

And let’s not end there:

In situations where an armed citizen helped prevent casualties, what factors helped to drive that outcome? (Anti-gunners are notorious for overlooking these particular stories, but we can certainly learn something from them too.)

Let me reiterate: The perpetrators of violent crimes are the ones responsible for those violent crimes. But until we start looking at the whole picture, I fear we’re at a standstill in making any real progress toward preventing such terrible tragedies in the future.