A couple of snippets from the letters section of a Bellingham, WA paper spoke volumes. Justice Scalia wrote: ”Of course the right was not unlimited, just as the First Amendment’s right of free speech was not. Thus, we do not read the Second Amendment to protect the right of citizens to carry arms for any sort of confrontation, just as we do not read the First Amendment to protect the right of citizens to speak for any purpose.” Also, ”...nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.” The huge elephant in the room is the extreme legalized wordiness used in decisions and these lengthy comments are also open to translation.

Later another writer wrote: ”These are revenge killings and we need to stop justifying them. There is plenty of discussion about weaponry. But we also need to bring light to the largely ignored problems of false entitlement and extreme egoism. These mass murderers seem to have both, starting with a full sense of false entitlement to take other people’s lives as necessary collateral damage in their personal war on whatever it is they don’t like.”
"As a society, we motivate this entitlement by removing the responsibility from the attacker and instead blame trauma; stress; rejection; social, political or religious beliefs; failure; divorce or job loss as legitimate reasons why a killers actions should be downplayed or even justified. There are no reasons, no causes, no situations, no excuses, no life experiences in any context that support the brutal murder of innocent people, much less children, as a solution. We don’t need to fight to stop this. We need to unite to stop this."