> a 9 year old girl fires off a machine made for the sole purpose of killing other human beings then fine.

That was hardly the case, my friend. The girl was not trying to kill anyone, or practicing to kill anyone.

Which is obvious.

She is the victim of foolish, unthinking parents, an inept instructor (who paid with his life), and the stupid owners of the gun range who (it seems) allow 9-year-olds to shoot submachine guns that they can barely hold properly. TV News tells me this is not uncommon, though accidents are, luckily, extraordinarily rare.

We do need tougher laws, and Olddude is absolutely right about the damned gun-show loopholes, which (among other things) one of my state's senators has promised he will *never* interfere with. (Get this: he's being opposed by the Tea Party as "too liberal.")

But in the shooting-range case, the only necessary law would be a law against idiots. The tragedy was 100% preventable by people exercising reasonable caution and common sense (which most of us the US have plenty of, by the way).

What were the parents thinking? Are they able to pay for the extended counseling this poor girl will require? And how about the instructor's family? There are certainly possibilities for civil lawsuits in various directions.