It's time to accept the reality of guns in our society.
More and more people will continue to die in these types of incidents. Some sick mother f*#%er will shoot a bunch of innocent people for no obvious reason.
The reality is that people kill people. The reality is that guns kill people. The reality is that people with guns kill people. All three previous sentences are the reality - not just one of them.
It is time for all sides to understand that there must be limits to what you can do with your guns. Most people do not want to go out to eat and be interrupted by some asshole walking in, that they don't know from Adam, with an automatic weapon or some type of long-range rifle. That is crossing the fucking line. The paranoia of some gun owners is scary as hell.
The argument that "they" will protect themselves and other occupants, if there is an incident like at Luby's in Texas, is nothing but bullshit. The "average" gun-owner, in many folks' eyes, are dangerous with their paranoia and political beliefs. Still, most folks are more tolerant of the 2nd Amendment rights than they are of the other rights in the Bill of Rights, for example, the First, the Fourth, and the Fifth. Unfortunately, much of this "toleration" comes out of fear. Average people are fearful of strangers with guns around their families. If not jack-booted thugs, they are doing the work of jack-booted thugs. A citizenry that lives in fear is vulnerable to losing all their rights.
Some of these gun-owners, hopefully not the majority, must understand that they are doing the work of the powerful government that they profess to hate. It is much easier to get the NRA involved in political protest than the National Guard or the US military. It is my opinion that they are being used by this same government to keep a certain amount of fear amongst the people, as well as control the political agenda. Just my opinion.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Where gun owners were "chewing them out"
Fyi, you met one of those gun owners who thinks these guys are idiots. Hello 
Using a gun to kill is ALWAYS wrong.
We have built justifications around some circumstances, but the bottom line is "THOU SHALT NOT KILL" (this from a religion hater 
)
you are getting over into uncharted waters and territory. 
While open-carry is appropriate in some situations (hunting, hiking, or in rural work environments) it becomes inappropriate and inflammatory outside of those environments.
This is why concealed-carry permits should be issued to those that wish to carry guns.
While much of the paranoia of the gun-owning right is hysterical bullshit (armed revolution? Really?) it does not change the fact that their worries about some sort of gun-culture war being waged on them are not entirely unfounded. You say so yourself that "in many folks' eyes, are dangerous with their paranoia and political beliefs." So you find their political beliefs dangerous and seek to disarm them... which winds up completely justifying them.
Look at the OPs and replies on DU about this... guns are a sickness, a disease, yet at the same time they mock people for saying things like "Democrats are coming for our guns".
Anti-gun/pro-gun-control DUers can be depended upon to bemoan the widespread availability of guns, the high rate of guns per-capita, and the high rate of gun ownership. So how can this be addressed (changed) except by, in one way or another, lowering the gun-ownership-per-capita and the guns-per-capita rates?
The gun ownership rate is about 30 to 35%; it's been decreasing slowly for a few decades as demographics change. I feel that at some point in my lifetime, without any changes in laws, the gun-ownership rate would fall to about 20 to 25% and stay there. This would be the "natural" demand for guns. So how do you propose to change this, to move it even lower?
The other issue is that the most popularly-supported gun-control proposals, such as assault-weapon bans and magazine limits, are ineffective measures. They are designed to achieve political goals; they cannot change the numbers on the ground. 99% of homicide incidents have either one or two victims; limiting magazine capacities will not have a noticeable impact. Neither will banning "assault weapons", as all rifles account for only a about 5% of homicides, and people will simply by "almost-assault-weapon" rifles after a ban. And the same features and accessories that are now common on "assault weapons" will show up on non-assault-weapon tactical rifles, such as pump-action or lever-action guns. Pistol grips, bayonet lugs, matte-black finishes, red-dot scopes, detachable magazines, attachment points for flashlights and lasers, flash reducers, barrel shrouds, quick-adjustable buttstocks, folding buttstocks, and front-end pistol grips will be features of tactical pump-action and lever-action rifles.
Those measures, however, will, motivate and politicize gun-owners, who will vote Republican, and then life-destroying conservative policies will be the law of the land. There is a ton of stuff that we should be doing that will not only lower the crime rate (including, of course, gun crimes) but will increase the standards of living of the entire population.
