The Daily BS • Bo Snerdley Cuts Through It!

Get my Daily BS twice-a-day news stack directly to your email.

What comes first: the shooter or the gun? Five steps to control mass shootings.


The opinions expressed in this piece are solely those of the author and do not reflect the opinions of any entity they may represent. 

In the wake of the recent Nashville shooting, the liberal narrative is overdrive. Sadly, instead of focusing on all the possible solutions, democrats only have one version of “reform.” Thanks to the liberals, we have become a country that blames “things” over people. We see it in everyday life. We blame the tesla over the person sleeping behind the wheel, fentanyl over the users, machinery over the operator, and, most importantly, guns over the shooter. Regardless of your stance on the second amendment, commonsense would tell us that focusing on the person and motives over the gun should be the first step before enacting gun-control measures. The only reform the democrats have ever proposed revolves around gun control without a single effort to define, outline, and prevent or control the issue of mass shootings. There are five basic steps I believe we can take without banning guns. Analyzing the facts, I believe these steps could stop or nearly stop mass shootings. This is my opinion, and there may be other or better ways, but the intention here is to highlight everything that can be done quickly and effectively before we jump on the anti-gun bandwagon.

  1. First and foremost, mass shootings are not defined by title 18, the federal code that defines the various types of murder. The FBI categorizes a mass killing as three or more dead; if a gun is used, it’s a mass shooting. There is no legal definition of a mass shooting, meaning specific punishments are not outlined. Today, mass murder is punished through multiple individual murder charges, which leaves it up to prosecutors and pre-defined murder sentencing. Relying on a DA’s equal application of the law recently has proved futile.


  1. Law enforcement will seal and control releasing the offender’s information to the media. The media should not be allowed to release information to create a celebrity shooter for ratings. Several mass shooters have been known to want the world to know their names. If there is no celebrity, that motive diminishes, making those celebrity wannabe shooters less inclined to shoot up a building. They can use the hurricane naming model or something similar.


  1. Automatic death penalty and hate crime enhancements. Regardless of the DA’s personal stance or motive, federal sentencing should reflect this. Mass shootings are hate crimes, period, regardless of motive. If you are found guilty, you will be fast-tracked through death row without appeal unless there is overwhelming evidence of a false conviction. The burden of proof is typically already met before a trial begins in these cases. Mass shooters generally don’t go to great lengths to hide evidence.


  1. Automatic home investigations. How often do we find out later of severe signs of violent crime motivation in the home not reported by family? To motivate families of these potential shooters to seek help, they must know they will also be held accountable. If there is definitive proof that the crime could have been stopped or was motivated by family, punishment should follow. Severe punishment.


  1. FBI dedicated mass shooting unit, manning a hotline with massive rewards if calls lead to preventing a shooting. Having hotlines set up with HUGE rewards if and only if a call prevents a mass shooting will motivate people who are generally afraid of “offending” someone to call. Furthermore, with almost every mass shooting, there were FBI misses. The FBI should have a dedicated team and man the hotline so they have 100% focus on these dangers. The amount could be upwards of a million dollars, anything to get people talking.


Is this the be-all and end-all? No. However, shouldn’t crime and punishment be the first step before we continually blame the gun or the tool? We don’t remove cars because people drive drunk. We don’t ban industrial machinery even though people get limbs cut off or die because of it. Most importantly, the democrats’ policies have only exacerbated the drug problem and provides free needles and pipes, therefore blaming the drug, not the user.

We saw this before during Bill Clinton’s reign when gang violence took thousands of lives per day. The assault weapons ban that was enacted, according to the DOJ reports, did very little to stop the violence. However, gang activity substantially diminished when serious crime reform was passed with brutal punishments. Democrats will never pass or support reform focusing on the shooters themselves by removing motive wherever possible and drawing a brutal punishment line in the sand. Policies as such would require law and order and remove blame from objects versus people. Furthermore, it would eliminate their ability to create campaign ad content with video snippets pretending to be outraged at the crime scene.

Will this stop mass shootings? Until we do something, we will never know. The same goes for guns; we can only go by previous gun control measures which have not worked. However, what comes first, the shooter or the gun? Unlike the chicken and the egg, we can definitively say the shooter.

Security measures, training, and being on high alert help the prevention of mass shootings. However, prevention only works if we remove the motive and catch the shooters before they act. In the Nashville case, there is a good chance the shooter had signs of hatred toward Christians or her idea of transphobic people that may have been stopped with the family or friends, knowing they can be jailed for lack of reporting or, worse, encouragement.

You might think these shooters want to die anyways; none of these things will deter them. Once again, you may be correct, but shouldn’t we at least try before we go after the constitution with a vengeance? History tells us that gun control measures have not been successful, and blaming the gun removes accountability from the shooter. The recent California shooting of a nightclub happened with a gun the shooter had since the nineties. They will use and find them if they have or want them. Sadly, democrats could care less about solutions and facts versus their Tik Tok clips painting themselves as champions and heroes.

Let’s make some commonsense reform before setting a significant precedent that the object is more important than the criminal. If I, the last gay conservative, can write up reform, what is congress’ excuse?

Let me know your thoughts on Twitter @lastgaycons.

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *