The shooting at a rally for the Kansas City Chiefs was something that alarmed a lot of folks. The fact that the death toll wasn't so much worse was really just a miracle, all things considered, though not enough of one to keep there from being any loss of life.

So I get people trying to understand just what they can do to prevent this from happening.

However, what they try to do should at least look feasible. That's not the case with the latest suggestion.

A Missouri Democratic lawmaker is pushing legislation that seeks to ban people from carrying guns into parades after the deadly shooting at the Kansas City Chiefs Super Bowl victory parade.

The bill, filed by Rep. Anthony Ealy, a Grandview Democrat, would require individuals who attend parades hosted by the state or cities to go through checkpoints with metal detectors or scanners. Any person with a firearm, except for police, would be prohibited from entering the parade.

So, let's get this straight. Ealy knows there will be events where there will be thousands of people, if not tens of thousands, and his solution is this?

Now, let's look at what's involved in an effort like this.

First, everything has to be moved into place well ahead of time, which requires a fair bit of logistical effort. They can't be moved too early or risk vandalism, which means they all need to be brought into place and dropped within a relatively short period of time before the event in question, which means a lot of manpower right from the start.

Then you have to cordon off city streets, which isn't unusual, but you also have to kick anyone living or working inside the parade route out as you do so because you also have to cordon off the surrounding area. Then you're going to funnel tens of thousands of people through a very limited number of entry points.

Of course, those entry points will have a large number of people in relatively close proximity, making all kinds of potential attacks even more deadly, but I suppose we're just going to ignore all of that. We're also going to ignore that if someone has nefarious intentions, they could just stash a firearm before the area is sealed off and access it after getting past security.

Maybe it's just me, but this doesn't seem remotely feasible.

Sure, they do it for concerts and sporting events all the time, but those events are generally all held at places wth a limited number of entry points anyway. Barring that, they're held places where people don't live and work each and every day, thus making it possible to have a greater ability to control the environment.

Look, I get the "do something" mindset. I understand it perfectly well because, whether I like to admit it or not, I'm just as likely to fall into that trap as anyone else.

But that "something" should at least look feasible with a cursory examination of what's involved. This is going to be a logistical nightmare and would likely result in a lot of places just canceling parades going forward.

Which would solve the issue of shooting at parades, I suppose.