From the boston story:
An 8-year-old boy was shot in the abdomen and killed late Sunday when three men walked up to the front door of his Roxbury home and began shooting, police said.
What gun law would have prevented this or any of the other tragic cases listed in this story? The guns used almost surely were illegally acquired and possessed, they certainly were used in an explicitly illegal manner (in all but one case in purposeful criminal acts by people without souls, one in what may have been a bone headed but unintentional illegal act). People who commit crimes like this have no respect for the law, community, life, or anything but their own screwed up values and personal desires. They will get their "gats", they will kill people, the only chance anyone in that dwelling had were for police to have caught the perps before they committed these crimes or for law abiding people around them to have their own guns and use them to defend against people like this. That is it. And still some of these kids would have died, because evil wins a lot more often than people like to admit.
As for the story about the Heller ruling making campus security tougher. Bull. Again, the person in the VT shooting acquired at least some of the guns he used illegally. He used multiple low to medium capacity mags. The Heller ruling doesn't prevent reasonable permit/licensing systems, reasonable mandatory instructional/education class requirements, etc. The laws have been improved since the VT case to get better mental health related information into the instant background check system and states are in the process of passing their own laws to match the federal law so they can comply. Law already allows for confiscation of weapons when a new mental or criminal adjudication is made that would invalidate a persons right to own them either temporarily or permanently. And Heller specifically upheld the right for states to create or authorize reasonable, traditionally recognized "gun free zones", such as government buildings and schools.
The story is crap, designed to evoke fear and dread for the supposedly inevitable wave of gun crime that is going to be unleashed by Heller and all the loosened gun controls. Never mind the fact that for 20+ years as states have been adopting right to carry laws and more liberalized gun control policies have seen either no change in their crime stats (Florida I think) or have seen different degrees of reduction (the rest). I think the one state that has seen no improvement in their crime stats was Florida, and that probably due to inflow of gang activity and the like in the same period, not due to any increase in the rate of permit holders using their guns in crimes. The fact that the state didn't see a marked increase in violent crime as the influx of gang and criminal activity occurred is very likely due in part to the increased presence of law abiding gun ownership and CCW issuance.
People who seek CCWs and lawful gun ownership are far more likely to use the gun in the prevention of a crime than to commit it. It is a net positive. Permit schemes are still constitutional and prudent (I just ask they be objectively administered and provide for timely issuance at reasonable cost). Background checks and laws to get removed from the "blacklist" have been improved with the blessing of all sides of the debate. Reasonable, traditional gun free zones can still exist (I would argue that colleges and universities are not a reasonable zone, but thats a debate for another day). It's all a net positive, but kids will still be killed by criminals with guns. Around 150 will die every year from accidental gun discharges (that covers cleaning accidents and poor gun handling accidents, children accidentally shooting each other, and parents accidentally killing the kids who they thought were intruders in the home). They'll also die by the hundreds each year in bathtub and washing bucket drowning accidents.