"eh, I don't think that it's really the gun policies' problems
it's the shooters' problems, whether driven by hate or having some kind of mental issue or whatnot"

1. The US is not alone in mental health issues -- why do we have so much gun violence? You can point to other countries with higher violent gun deaths, but you'll note that most of those countries are tiered lower than the US in development.
2. Guns are objects, and as such are easier to regulate than mental health.

"He could've used anything else to kill, but a gun happened to be most convenient in this situation. He could've used like a car or something, but even if a car had been used to kill, would that mean that cars should be banned too? no."

The problem with this argument is that while care do have high mortality rates, guns have higher ones. (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm)

Second, firearms are more capable of mass killings due to their smaller size (allowing them to enter more places such as schools and allowing for someone to carry multiple of them) and their ease of use. It's hard(er) to use a car to kill people repeatedly.

Third, cars have *tons* of safety regulations surrounding them.

Finally, cars serve a purpose of transportation. Guns serve the sole purpose of killing. One may argue the use for self-defense but no-one needs a semi-automatic gun for defense. You don't need the 315 rounds of ammo that the Uvalde shooter brought to the school to defend yourself.

"And plus, anyone notice that places with stricter gun laws happen to have more shootings than those that don't? "

Uh what? (https://www.bmj.com/company/newsroom/higher-rates-of-mass-shootings-in-us-states-with-more-relaxed-gun-control-laws/)

"Probably since most shooters get their guns illegally from the black market, so policies should really be more centered towards that rather than the gun policies that we have now."

Oh great, lets start policing the black market. Not like we tried to do that for years with with the war on drugs. Didn't realize this was such an easy solution (/s)

Also, just because a policy will have only a slight impact doesn't mean it shouldn't be implemented.

"If the teachers in that school were allowed to have guns on them (ACTUALLY, I'm not sure if they were allowed to have guns on them, but I'll assume no), maybe they could've used them in defense."

So you're suggesting to arm every teacher in a school? And train them? The point of that is served in part by SROs. This suggestion is putting guns (designated killing weapons) into tons of people, increasing the probability that shootings happen. You can't possibly train every teacher in every school in the US to use a gun properly and even less to expect school gun violence to go down because of it.

"So, to sum up, I think that gun policies in the US are strict enough, but the problem comes from the shooters and the black market. I mean, look at a country like Switzerland. Tons of guns, barely any shootings."

As @bove, mentioned, the gun distribution is a difference factor of about 6 with the US having many more. Additionally, Ramos (Uvalde shooter) purchased his weapons legally. This is not a black market issue. This is a gun control issue.

"I do agree with the basis of OP. What happened on Tuesday was terrible, and stuff like this has been happening way too much, and those elementary schoolers, dead or alive, should not be experiencing something like this."

Obviously everyone agrees that 19 children dead is terrible and has intense PTSD for survivors. The point is that saying "it's so sad" and not doing anything about it is cold-hearted. Why are you not willing to allow tighter gun control laws on weapons you should never have to use use to save (or even hope to save) some kid's lives?

"I just don't agree with people saying that there should be stricter gun laws."

It's fine to disagree and pose different opinions but if you want to maintain that opinion, it'd be great if you can reply to this post where I tried to refute your claims. Maybe my logic isn't correct, but we can't know without disagreement and discussion.

"That's basically all I have to say. Now, it's fine if you don't agree with me, but I don't need a whole big argument in this thread."

I think that if you're going to pose an opinion and then say to not argue over it, it'd be best not to pose your opinion and try to force people to keep their mouths shut.

---

I would recommend reading this thread: https://www.chiefdelphi.com/t/first-statement-on-shooting-in-uvalde-tx/412109. While it started about a specific event it gradually became a discussion on gun control that brings up good points. It's admittedly a bit of a leftist forum, but everyone on that forum is quite intelligent (they literally work on robots) and comes from across the US. It's a good read.

Thanks.