Meanwhile, his central argument isn't a new one though it's argued with a impressive bravado:
I guarantee that if four or five or six people had guns on them in that theater, either that kid would never have gone in there, or he would have gotten blown away. That’s just the way it is. I think you have to send a message to the criminals: ”No no no no no, you think you’ve got a gun? I’ve got a bigger gun. I’ve got two guns on you.” It’s simple psychology, really.
For a slightly different perspective on the topic, consider that when Rep. Louis Gohmert made a similar argument, Mayor Michael Bloomberg (among others) had this to say: "To arm everybody and have the wild west all the time is one of the more nonsensical things you can say."
Vice's tweet promoting the piece, meanwhile, sounds a bit confused:
Canseco's own statement—tweeted before the column ran—seems a bit more excited: "Just signed a deal with vice magazine for a weekly column. Watch out because the truth will hurt sensitive people. No holds barred." What he lacks in information, he more than makes up for macho-man bravado, which, we imagine, his fans, or gawkers, will surely enjoy. So, uh, if that's you, we guess you should read it. But if you're looking for a contribution to the gun debate, maybe not so much.