Let's break this down, though;
Effect - People have been murdered.
Cause - Somebody else murdered them.
Correlation - Person used a gun\knife\bomb\poison.

See how this scientific principal works?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation

If anti-gun zealots want to have a reasonable, engaging, and effective discussion about events like this, than a grasp on correlation vs. causation is mandatory. Unfortunately, those that are zealot level anti-gun, are that way based on the premise that the correlated entity IS the cause, and there is no reasonable discussion that can be had with that level of ignorance.

Well done for raising this point Tallyho, it never ceases to amaze me when ever there is a massacre that people will defend guns irrespective of how clearly damaging they are, and it's good to create a debate, and with our American friends its likely to cause some polarisation. What I will add is that I'm British, Ive lived for a short time in America, Canada, Australia and Europe, in my opinion in America there is a palpable fear and mistrust, which isn't present in countries with more stringent gun control, As I see it the more people who have guns, the more prevalent they are, the more people fear each other and buy guns for protection and so the cycle continues. And this argument that guns dont kill people, people kill people, there is some truth in it, but its a lot harder to kill someone with your bare hands than it is with a gun. Im not saying eradicate guns, but America could learn something from other developed nations.

I hate how Americans have invented this word "burglarizing" it really sounds ignorant, that they just invented a word on the spot when they cant think of either burgling, burgle, burgles or burgled for describing what a burglar does

Did a painter painterize a canvas?, does a baker bakerize bread? does a politician fuckerize you over?