Because everything is about politics, and the more horrific, the more people can be scared into Democrat schemes that have failed for decades. They really don’t care about the kids. All of the anti-gun proposals they’ve put forward wouldn’t have done a damn thing to stop the murders at Connecticut, and everything they do makes government abuses (and ultimately massacres) more likely in the future (however far along the road that may be). The more the narrative can be changed, the more the story can be told that if you’re opposed to giving more power to the government, you’re a “loony”. You’re a “loony” if you can look to history across the globe and even within the US and see that governments unchecked by citizenry become despotic, that individuals denied the tools to resist tyranny at the individual level (crime) and the national level (govt. oppression) end up suffering for it.
Let it sink in: Democrats loved those murders. It allows them to push their agenda. Anyone shaken with grief and loss can be more easily swayed into doing “something”, and with relentless calls for tyranny, people can believe it even sounds good, even though they logically know it cannot work. That’s why Democrats love the horror and shock. They want more murders, they want more blood, they want more innocents dying because it pushes their agenda. They positively revel in it.
Video was recently found of the Democrat strategy meeting held shortly after the Newtown murders:
Every time concealed carry or some other pro-gun measure passes, Democrats yell “the streets will run red with blood” and that “it will be the gunfight at the OK corral/the Old West”. Never happens, but they have to scare you with fanciful tales of things don’t happen, and history proves every time doesn’t happen. Every time the streets do run red with blood – almost invariably in a “gun free zone” – they cry that they need more government power to make you “safer”. Their definition of safe, however, means disarmed and subject to tyranny – whether it be from a regular criminal or defenseless against a massacre killer (whether a lunatic on his own or a lunatic in a government uniform).
By contrast, every life saved by a defensive gun use against crime is a win for the Second Amendment and supporters of the Constitution. Every robbery or attack or rape deterred by show of force that results in no shots fired doesn’t make it to the news, but strengthens the argument for citizens’ natural right of self defense. Every day that goes by where no Americans are herded into camps because they’re the wrong color, or every day that goes by where there are no lynchings because minorities can arm themselves (after all, the roots of gun control are there as racist controls of people), every day that goes by with less tyranny at the individual to national level is a win for the Second Amendment, and for the Second Amendment’s vocal supporters.
The Second Amendment arms the good guys, and prevents the worst bad guys from taking over government. Individual bad guys may break the law and commit crimes, but will always they do that anyway; and the Second Amendment respects the good citizens’ natural rights to a means of defense.