No Solution To Mass Murders

Listening to a debate on radio re various gun laws.  A trenchant comment by one of the debaters:  "Considering all the gun laws before Congress now, it should be noted that not one of those laws, if enacted, would have prevented ANY of the mass murders of the last 40 years or so". 

Not one limitation due to "mental illness", however defined, would have stopped any of them either.  There was no apparent mental illness in the mass murderers, unless you consider mild or moderate depression, and that would include almost everyone in the US.  The mass murderers were not psychotic.  They had not lost touch with reality.  They were not mentally incompetent.  They simply made wicked choices, and it should be obvious to anyone that the concept of "free will" must include the capacity to make wrong choices or the concept is meaningless.

It is notable that, with the exception of terrorist attacks (such as in Oklahoma City), the killers expected to die, and were in fact without any hope.  So threats and punishments would never be effective; you can't threaten someone who is already hopeless.  Prohibition of guns has not been effective, any more than the prohibition of alcohol was in the '20s.  In Sandy Hook the murderer stole guns from a family member.  Fertilizer was the weapon of choice in Oklahoma City.  There simply is no way to limit weapons.  We will always have our bare hands.

I think we have to face the fact that this problem is not solvable.  Whatever we decide to do will not limit the possibility of mass murders.  We can lose our civil liberties in the attempt, but we will not be able to stop killers, even with the most stringent of laws.  How much are we willing to surrender our civil liberties to gain an illusion of safety, which will be lost on the very next mass murder?