True. But in the preceding 27 years to Dunblane there were 17. 3 were terrorism. 1 was in Northern Ireland, where the law remains the same.
So arguably, 12. The removal of access to pistols has reduced the occurrance by 3 in a nearly thirty year period.
Don't get me wrong, three fewer is good.
BUT
People who are going to do bad things are going to do bad things.
If you are of a mind to kill people, you are willing to break the law. Therefore the legality of access to firearms is irrelevant to you.
In the UK nearly all gun crime is committed with illegally held firearms.
The process of obtaining and keeping firearms in the UK is amongst the most stringent in the world, when applied correctly. There are failures, as in Plymouth, where the shooter should not have had a firearm. Even his own mother had pleaded with the Police to not return his gun. Failure to apply the law will not be changed by changing the law.
Of course, you could outlaw all firearms. That means bye bye RIFS too.
So long to air rifles, catapults, bows, crossbows.... stones? Screwdrivers? Chainsaws... The list is endless.
If it's dangerous, it should be banned. There is more chance of you dying in the UK by crossing the road than there is of you being shot.
If it's dangerous, should it be banned? Should we live our lives in cotton wool? No. That would be boring.
As the philosopher DMX once said
"Guns don't kill people. People kill people."
p.s. apologies for the ramble, three kids and 4 dogs impeding concentration.
p.p.s dogs kill people sometimes. They should probably all be banned.
p.p.s kids kill people. They should probably be banned too.
p.p.p.s Grown ups kill people... oh ffs