dank. knows everything about everyone all the time... because the internet tells him so.
.. there's a group of these people on the forum, the internet has made them an expert at virtually everything, and there's a conspiracy behind almost every story.
As many others have pointed out, it's too late for that. A more reasonable approach IMO, is to target specific weapons (such as assault rifles) that have no place in the "legitimate use" categories, such as personal protection, target shooting or hunting. As I have stated before, I believe the casualty rate in this case would have been lessened had the shooter been limited to handguns or a hunting rifle.
I also believe that the "Chris Rock" solution although intended as a joke, has some merit. Limiting access to ammunition would be a more effective method of "control" than would banning something which is already ubiquitous in society.
Of course, there will always be a black market for these items, but I think the most realistic goal is to make them more difficult to acquire. (according to a report on CNN, all of Holme's weapons were obtained legally)
I like your more pragmatic approach, but if people can buy guns legally, they can by munitions just as readily. Chris Rock is a comedian so he obviously uses hyperbole to get his joke across.. I get the point, but he and anyone who takes this advice seriously overlooks that bullets will be sold cheaper.. on the black market, creating yet another major criminal organisation on top of already existing ones relating to the broad spectrum of firearms and munitions.
It's hard not to laugh at the post you quoted, like someone with a gun should be combated with karate, ROFL. Even better, that only police and government should be allowed weapons.. the stupidity behind that is impossible to take seriously or as anything more than a troll. I'm still laughing at it days later.