I do feel sorry for the families of the people killed by the sick bastard and I wish those killers would either suicide themselves first or be caught so we can learn from them before executing them.
However, the dad's logic is faulty as many have pointed out here already. I just need to vent a little. Sorry for using the dad's statement as a springboard but it could apply to many anti 2nd statements I've heard.
Using the dad's logic, if that father owns a knife and/or a vehicle, he is equally to blame for the murders that used those weapons. We are not even talking just this incident, he is at fault for every murder that has ever been committed with those objects...using the dad's logic. Anyone defending his right to own a knife or vehicle is equally guilty of murder in the dad's view. Why then is he not calling out to ban those killer items? The father may try to say that these are every day items, they are practical items, they are a convenience to everyone, etc (referring to the car and knife). Again using his logic that the
object is to blame for the criminal actions they are used for, then no amount of convenience should justify their existence. If his logic is true, then the argument "but the knife/car/bat is not primarily used to kill" or "has other uses besides killing" is not valid because they can and will be used to kill with no modifications except the will of the
user. The design intent of the object should not play a part in judging its "guilt" in the crime. Unless the dad is saying that the deaths due to being intentionally run over by a car or stabbed to death are somehow less tragic, less criminal, less worthy of our sympathy and outrage than those killed with a firearm simply because of the different object used to commit the murder? Since the object is to blame in these violent acts, the evil that an object is capable of doing is all that matters in the dad's view because he is claiming that all the good performed by good people with a firearm is meaningless and pales when compared to the violent acts committed with a firearm thus they need to be banned.
His rage is real, justified and reasonable and I am not saying otherwise. He should be mad as hell ... at the killer, at the fact that he slipped through the system and was allowed to purchase a firearm (assumption), at the fact that no one even had a chance to defend themselves against this maniac. He should not be mad at me, my firearms or my 2nd Amendment rights for something that we had nothing to do with.
OK, rant over.

Calm the f*#ck down...