It's a question most of us heard, read or asked following Stawicki's rampage. Bagshaw therein drew up Sally's 16, a list of "immediate short-term actions to long-term strategies, that together we can work to achieve."
Among Sally's 16: more cops, taking steps to break the code of silence that prevents perpetrators from being identified, and - drum roll please - tighter state gun laws.
As should come as a surprise to no one, Sally's 16, and its inclusion of tighter gun laws, raised the ire of many.
As Daily Weekly commenter Loki writes:
A nutjob goes off on a random shooting spree? Heaven forfend we should think about, what, possibly throwing a net over some of the local crazoids before they get to that point! Isn't it much better to excises that portion of the Constitution that says all free Americans have the right to have firearms? After all, the Constitution WAS written by a bunch of old dead White guys, so what's it worth, really?
There have been so many studies done, books written, etc., about the effects of legislation on violent crimes committed with firearms that there is no point in listing them all. All but the most outrageously false of them have reached the same conclusion; criminals don't register guns, nor does legislation stop insane people from acting insanely.
The shooters father when interviewed spoke of his anger and fragile mental health...and of the fact that he knew his son had weapons. Mightn't he have had a chance to do something? Maybe even call in the police...that is, if Seattle-ites had the will to try and corral mentally ill people for treatment.
But anyone taking a walk through Pioneer Square can tell you that they don't.