At a Parkland high school, a thug went in and killed 17 while injuring several more; he was captured elsewhere and after several hours.  At a Maryland school, a thug went in, wounded two, and was killed.

There are some critical differences in the two situations.

The Parkland thug had a semi-automatic rifle, while the Maryland thug had a hand gun.

The Parkland thug obtained his rifle legally, if with some trouble (one potential seller refused the sale, having developed his own suspicions while interacting with the thug).  The Maryland thug obtained his pistol illegally.

At Parkland, the armed responder was a cop, stationed outside the school (I’m eliding his failure to enter).  At the Maryland school, the armed responder was inside the school.

There are a couple of lessons here.  One is that gun control laws didn’t keep the Maryland thug from getting his illegal weapon.  The other is that possessing guns while inside the target and being trained in their use shortened the shooting incident and yielded far fewer casualties and far less lethality.

Those lessons are universal.  They apply in schools, in supermarkets and other public gathering places, and around in the home.

There is a role for gun control.  Training in the use of guns is critical.  Practice so the defender can fire accurately is critical.  That’s critical gun control.