You're asking me to prove he was sincere, but sincerity is an internal mental state. I can't prove a negative any more than you can prove he was secretly celebrating school shootings.
Unless he explicitly said he was lying, the only evidence we have is what he actually said. He called them unfortunate, compared them to other risks society accepts, and argued for stricter screening of gun purchasers. End of discussion
You're proving my point. He wasn't "supportive of school shootings" he explicitly called them unfortunate and argued they're a cost of preserving a constitutional right, just like society accepts risks that come with other freedoms. You can disagree with that argument all day long, but twisting it into "he supports school shootings" is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate misrepresentation of what he actually said. If we're going to criticize someone's position, we should criticize what they actually believe, not a caricature of it.
You're literally talking what he said WAYYY out of context. That wasn't even what he had originally said. He said school shootings are an unfortunate side affect of having guns, much the same car crashes and vehicular homicides are an unfortunate side affect of owning cars. Both are dangerous machines that require mentally sound people to operate and own. He was also for stricter gun security in terms of people purchasing them. But ofc you're not going to mention that..
