But I hope you are right.

an underestimate.

While firearms are unpopular in many big cities they are quite popular elsewhere. Since gun owners vote most politicians in Congress from the more gun friendly areas are somewhat reluctant to vote for strong gun control. They fear they will not get reelected.

Than the KNOWLEDGE, they will not get reelected.

if he used a gas can or firebombs,
https://www.queerty.com/not-to-ruin-your-pride-but-today-marks-the-deadliest-gay-massacre-in-us-history-20111001
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Land_fire
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawson_murder_case

Do you think any of these virtue signalling fools would actually care?

then do let us know.

terrorist attacks they certainly do around the world. When gun prohibitionists say "Australia" they ignore the fact that there were just as many mass shootings, using US FBI definition, before and after Port Authur and the National Firearms Agreement. Of course they don't bother to mention the several mass murder by arson since the NFA.

My point was had he used that, none of those politicians would say or do shit. Why? Because there is nothing in it for them. Or, what if they used machine guns off the black market like like the attackers in Europe?

I despise what Sam Harris calls the regressive left as much as I do the right wing. Actually more, because of the added bonus of hypocrisy. Just watch the Young Turks, which is ran by an Armenian genocide denier, or MSNBC. Had he been an NRA member, it would be "all NRA members or rednecks", if were a Mormon, Larry O'Donnell on MSNBC would be screaming about evil Mormons. Christians, then the floodgates of bigotry would be opened up by fake liberals. Since it wasn't, silence.

and Denmark prevented ISIS types from getting machine guns and attacking a magazine, concert, art gallery, and pub.

That the 2d protects an individual right to keep and bear firearms I probably could live with an AWB after yesterday. I know that those types of weapons are used in very few crimes but they do seem to be a weapon of choice for mass shooters. Frankly doubt it would make a ton of difference though - shooters would just switch to other weapons.

if so, it is redundant.

Just like the Omar Mateen who possessed no criminal record at all, few, if any, shootings have been perpetrated by people who legally possessed a weapon that otherwise would have been ineligible because they possessed a misdemeanor "hate" conviction.

It's a solution looking for a problem, grass and gratuitous gun control grandstanding aimed at ideologues and the uninformed, has little chance of passing in Congress, and just the attempt to pass such useless laws will do little but energize pro-gun rights people in the upcoming election, many of whom are in important swing states and will definitely not support Democrats.

In fact, I don't believe there's been a single law that could remotely pass constitutional muster proposed recently that would have prevented the recent shooting, including an new AWB, as even the most common pistols in civilian hands are capable of firing with the same rate of fire as any "scary black rifle" (semi-automatic: one pull of the trigger, one shot), or a prohibition on the purchase of weapons by anyone on the various and generally secret and unappealable government "watch lists." Note that Mateen also carried a Glock 17, one of the most popular pistols in the world, during the attack, and he was removed from government lists when the FBI determined his contacts with an alleged suicide bomber had been minimal.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-orlando-nightclub-shooting-live-omar-mateen-was-taken-off-a-terrorist-1465772737-htmlstory.html

I'll begin to take gun control advocates seriously when they actually begin to propose laws that have a reasonable chance of successfully reducing gun violence or crime generally and are carefully targeted at those who actually commit such violence without impeding the rights of tens of millions of other law-abiding Americans.

Just saying

"reasonably suspected" could actually be rather arbitrary and capricious in practice.
I think the existing list is complete enough.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/general-information/fact-sheet

A person who has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year or any state offense classified by the state as a misdemeanor and is punishable by a term of imprisonment of more than two years.

Persons who are fugitives of justice—for example, the subject of an active felony or misdemeanor warrant.

An unlawful user and/or an addict of any controlled substance; for example, a person convicted for the use or possession of a controlled substance within the past year; or a person with multiple arrests for the use or possession of a controlled substance within the past five years with the most recent arrest occurring within the past year; or a person found through a drug test to use a controlled substance unlawfully, provided the test was administered within the past year.

A person adjudicated mental defective or involuntarily committed to a mental institution or incompetent to handle own affairs, including dispositions to criminal charges of found not guilty by reason of insanity or found incompetent to stand trial.

A person who, being an alien, is illegally or unlawfully in the United States.

A person who, being an alien except as provided in subsection (y) (2), has been admitted to the United States under a non-immigrant visa.

A person dishonorably discharged from the United States Armed Forces.

A person who has renounced his/her United States citizenship.

The subject of a protective order issued after a hearing in which the respondent had notice that restrains them from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such partner. This does not include ex parte orders.

A person convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime which includes the use or attempted use of physical force or threatened use of a deadly weapon and the defendant was the spouse, former spouse, parent, guardian of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited in the past with the victim as a spouse, parent, guardian or similar situation to a spouse, parent or guardian of the victim.

A person who is under indictment or information for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.

What is the standard?