Final answer:
Democrats advocate for stricter gun control, including bans on certain firearms, waiting periods, and comprehensive background checks. Stricter laws may have potentially identified red flags in the Parkland shooter's background, but it is unclear if this would have definitively prevented the tragedy.
Step-by-step explanation:
Gun control and the regulations democrats want to implement often revolve around the desire to reduce gun violence by imposing certain restrictions. Some democrats advocate for the total ban of certain types of firearms, while others push for more stringent measures without banning guns outright. These measures include longer waiting periods, deeper background checks for all gun sales, including private dealers, and restrictions on who can possess firearms, particularly focusing on individuals with mental health issues.
Following the tragic shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, debates intensified over whether stricter gun laws could have prevented the massacre. It's suggested that with stronger controls over gun ownership, particularly with improvements in the background checking process such as those proposed by the Fix-NICS Act, there may have been a chance to identify red flags concerning the shooter's mental health and potentially prevent the tragedy. However, this is speculative, and it is difficult to determine definitively whether these measures would have changed the outcome.