The shooting aimed toward members of Congress is turning up the heat on the gun debate.
On this issue we found the following interesting:
In both Virginia and California it is possible to buy firearms without a permit. Not illogically, campaigners for stricter gun ownership laws responded to the Virginia attack by suggesting the need for tighter controls. Pro-gun campaigners were as quick to argue that, had Mr Hodgkinson's victims been armed, as they were catching fly-balls or warming up on deck, they would have been better able to defend themselves. Congressman Tom Garrett of Virginia, a Republican, noted that legislation he has proposed to make it easier for people to carry guns in Washington, DC, where many of the players live, should help answer that.
When a Democratic congresswoman from Arizona, Gabrielle Giffords, was shot and maimed in 2011, in an attack that claimed six lives, Democrats suggested the hostility Republicans had been stirring against Barack Obama was to blame. Now it was the turn of Republicans, bolstered by revelations that Mr Hodgkinson had volunteered to campaign for Senator Bernie Sanders, to make the same argument. 'The hyperbolic vitriol from the left has spurred threats and now action without historical parallel,' Mr Garrett tweeted.
Both sides have a point. The hatred millions of American express towards President Trump, four months into his term, may be unprecedented. Then again, no one has done more to coarsen political debate than him: recall the 'lock her up' chants at campaign rallies last summer, or the offer to pay the legal costs of someone who beat up a protester. But intemperate political debate is not incitement to violence. Some are cynically confusing legitimate efforts to hold a rule-breaking president to account with the hostility of left-leaning voters and activists, including violent extremists like Mr Hodgkinson. That approach is likely to stir even more hatred-and to make lawmakers, who have been badly shaken by the shooting of Mr Scalise, less safe. The Economist