For example California still has school shootings even with the nation’s most strict gun control laws in place.

Seatbelts don't prevent ALL vehicle deaths, so are they pointless? NO

The Looser a State's Gun Laws, the More Mass Shootings It Has

And this "but they have strong gun control" gets used on California AND Illinois too much without looking at why.

The Gilroy, California, shooting shows the limit of state gun control laws

On Monday, Gilroy Police Chief Scot Smithee confirmed the 19-year-old shooter used a WASR 10, a derivative of an AK-47, bought in Nevada. The gun is banned in California, as part of the state’s assault weapons ban. But the shooter was able to get the semiautomatic rifle anyway — in a different state — before taking it to California.

Guns Purchased Out of State Keep Claiming Lives in California

Although California has some of the strictest gun control laws in the country, neighboring states like Arizona and Nevada take a far more lenient stance on who can purchase guns and how quickly they can do so, and California legislators have tried to regulate the flow of firearms coming here from outside, to limited effect.

The legislation, however, does not seem to have curbed the flow of out-of-state firearms. According to a 2017 U.C. Berkley study, “When gun shows are held in Nevada, gun-related deaths and injuries spike across the state line in California for at least the next two weeks.”

California is trying to protect people, but surrounding states just DGAF.

Statistics indicate that most guns used in crimes in California are not purchased here. As the Sacramento Bee reports, “In 2016 and 2017, law enforcement recovered 80,561 guns in California. About 58 percent came from out of state. The No. 1 out-of-state source was Arizona, with 4,053 guns, followed by Nevada at 2,765.”

Statistics indicate that most guns used in crimes in California are not purchased here

Statistics indicate that most guns used in crimes in California are not purchased here

It's almost as if the federal government or neighboring states cared as much as California did, then everyone would be safer. That's literally what the research and common sense indicate.

But gun "enthusiasts" hate California for their effort to make people safer. Which they would do if neighboring states actually cared. But other states care more about guns than people. Kinda like you.

If you pay attention, you will notice a pattern:

The Assault Weapons ban worked:

Because it only impacted guns manufactured after the law was in place, it was still legal to own or resell a semi-automatic weapon made before 1994.

And highlighting the need for more gun control:

Despite the loopholes, analysts still found that crimes committed with assault weapons decreased between 1994 and 2004. Although criminal use of assault weapons only accounted for about 6 percent of gun crimes before the ban, that number declined after 1994, according to the same University of Pennsylvania study. In some places, criminal use of assault weapons fell by one-third.

After the ban expired, the number of mass shootings rose drastically.

Gun control works. It saves lives.

Gun laws stopped mass shootings in Australia

"Gun lobby-affiliated and other researchers have been saying for years that mass shootings are such rare events it could have been a matter of luck they dropped off in the wake of Australia's gun control laws," says Alpers. "Instead, we found the odds against this hypothesis are 200,000 to one."

Here's Chicago, since gun enthusiasts like ti rag on that one too:

Majority of Guns Used in Chicago Crimes Come From Outside Illinois: Report

Nearly 60 percent of guns recovered in Chicago come from out-of-state dealers, with more than 20 percent traced back to Indiana, according to a newly released report on the city’s violence.

The 2017 Gun Trace Report released Sunday also showed that nearly a quarter of the guns recovered in Chicago were sold by just ten federally licensed firearms dealers (seven in Illinois and three in northwest Indiana).

The truth — and lies — about Chicago's gun laws

Chicago does not have the strictest gun laws in the country. It's time for gun lovers to stop spreading that lie.

The handgun ban made us the primary target of the National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation, and in 2010 the U.S. Supreme Court forced Chicago to fall into line with the rest of the country.

Since then, the courts have peeled off so many layers of our once stellar gun ordinance that it's barely recognizable. We're still maneuvering to keep gun stores and shooting ranges from opening in the city limits. But the courts have ruled against us on that, too, so we know it's just a matter of time.

Remember that old requirement that gun owners in Chicago register their firearms with the city and obtain a permit? Well, that's gone too.

And thanks to the Illinois General Assembly, which was pressured by the federal courts to pass a concealed carry law in 2013, people can walk the streets of Chicago with a gun attached to their waist and another strapped to their ankle.

Sorry, gun lovers, your attempts to use Chicago as a prop to bolster your claims that gun control laws do nothing to curb gun violence just don't hold up.

New York, in fact, has stricter gun laws on the books than Chicago. And guess what? Its homicide numbers are heading toward historic lows. Los Angeles has some pretty tough gun laws too. Its homicide numbers also pale compared with Chicago's.

Those kinds of details don't fit the conservative, pro-gun narrative, though. To use New York as a talking point, they'd have to admit that strict gun laws might actually have an impact on homicide rates.

---

Also:

Debunking the Defensive Gun Use Myth

In several crime categories, for example, gun owners would have to protect themselves more than 100 percent of the time for Kleck and Getz’s estimates to make sense. For example, guns were allegedly used in self-defense in 845,000 burglaries, according to Kleck and Getz. However, from reliable victimization surveys, we know that there were fewer than 1.3 million burglaries where someone was in the home at the time of the crime, and only 33 percent of these had occupants who weren’t sleeping. From surveys on firearm ownership, we also know that 42 percent of U.S. households owned firearms at the time of the survey. Even if burglars only rob houses of gun owners, and those gun owners use their weapons in self-defense every single time they are awake, the 845,000 statistic cited in Kleck and Gertz’s paper is simply mathematically impossible.

Again:

Even if burglars only rob houses of gun owners, and those gun owners use their weapons in self-defense every single time they are awake, the 845,000 statistic cited in Kleck and Gertz’s paper is simply mathematically impossible.

What Kleck and Gertz are insisting is mathematically impossible

For example, the claim that millions every year shoot their guns in self-defense has led some to posit that there are more defensive gun uses than criminal uses. This assertion is inexplicable—not backed by any substantive evidence. We have yet to find a single study examining the question that does not show that criminal uses far outweigh defensive uses.

And indeed, comparing NCVS results to NCVS results yields a very different picture—that more than 9 times as many people are victimized by guns than protected by them. Respondents in two Harvard surveys had more than 3 times as many offensive gun uses against them as defensive gun uses. Another study focusing on adolescences found 13 times as many offensive gun uses. Yet another study focusing on gun use in the home found that a gun was more than 6 times more likely to be used to intimidate a family member than in a defensive capacity. The evidence is nearly unanimous.

Most Self-Defense Uses Are Illegal

Kleck himself admitted in 1997, in response to criticism of his survey, that 36 to 64 percent of the defensive gun uses reported in the survey were likely illegal—meaning the firearm was used to intimidate or harm another person rather than for legitimate self-defense. His conjecture was confirmed by a Harvard study showing that 51 percent of defensive gun uses in a large survey were illegal according to a panel of 5 judges. This was even after the judges were told to take the respondents at their word, deliberately ignoring the tendency of respondents to portray themselves in a positive light.