No argument here; there's no clear evidence that fatalities would be dramatically reduced from these sorts of perpetrators if guns were not available. [1] Psych

No argument here; there's no clear evidence that fatalities would be dramatically reduced from these sorts of perpetrators if guns were not available. [1] Psychology is too variable to predict whether any particular killer would resort to less direct methods like bombs or poisoning if guns were not available to them. Serial killers tend to prefer either more direct or less direct methods with not much cross-over (the same serial killer will almost never switch between strangling and poisoning, for instance), but I don't know if there's evidence of rampage killers having a similar bias in their selection of weapons/methods. Also note the gender gap in rampage killers generally, and school rampage killers specifically. [ibid] Perhaps all males should be locked up until their obvious psychological faults, which contribute to this tendency, can be dealt with. The problem with increasing sensitivity to mental health issues is the vagueness of some of the "warning signs". Should society punish students for playing cowboys and indians on the playground, miming gunplay, drawing or writing about scenes involving killing? Lots of adolescents who exhibit the same "warning signs" (though not going so far as to plan an attack or execute it) as school rampage killers turn out just fine without intervention. What level of interference and "reeducation" of marginalized and/or antisocial students should be tolerated in the name of catching the small minority who go on to commit these heinous acts? [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers