Its sad that in the wake of the shooting, people are asking irrelevant questions: Why did he do it? Why didn't anyone see the signs? How could this be prevented? Who is to blame? Blah blah. In the quest for answers, the militant pacifists often think the solution is to ban firearms or restrict them so severely that one cannot employ a firearm until a DNA sample is given to open the safe that houses the key to the underground bunker the firearm is in.
It seems people so easily overlook the fact that it is not society's fault that it happened, it was the individuals fault for committing the actions. Do not blame society and do not penalize society and take away our RIGHTS because of an individual.
Here is the question that should be asked and still hasn't by the major media and online news sources: In a state that allows both open AND concealed carry, why was not anyone else carrying a firearm in that event? How many lives could of been saved if, say, half of the people were carrying a firearm? These questions in my opinion are more relevant to preventing future mass murders and crazed gunman incidents then any other question.
If someone really wants to go on a shooting/stabbing/baby seal clubbing rampage, there is almost always only going to be one unpreventable death: the first casualty that gets caught by surprise. Almost every other casualty could of been prevented. Instead the casualties pile up because of laws, ideals, philosophies, laziness, etc. that keep the populace from carrying a firearm for protection.
As for the author of the Bradenton article and his question to why anyone would need a 30 round "clip" (its a magazine, I hate it when they call it clip
): On the two way range, 30rds can go be expended pretty quickly if it is not disciplined, coordinated, and controlled fire.