[quote="the clockmaker" post="528.399723.16406040"]
There are going to be tragedies every day, and in the long run we're all dead, but I want to spend my brief time on this earth doing cool things. Remember, guns don't kill people....
I hate that argument.
Allow me to present a rediculous comparison: Hammers don't drive nails, people WITH hammers drive nails. BUT, if a person didn't have a hammer, it would make driving that nail a DAMN lot harder.
Guns don't kill people, people kill people. But people have a severely reduced ability TO kill people without a gun.
Guns are, as we are frequently reminded by those on the anti-side of the gun control debate "A tool", but the rough definition of a tool is "A device, used to perform or facilitate manual or mechanical work." Guns are indeed a tool, a tool to make a job (to wit: Killing) easier. Without said tool, the job would be more difficult. Increased difficulty often results in lower performance of said job. I'd like to see someone kill 10+ people in a matter of minutes with their bare hands.
Would you rather be trapped in a room full of guns with the Pope, or be trapped in an empty room with Charles Manson?
Do you even have to ask? I think that is the most one brain-dead hypotetical I have ever heard of. The Pope, if it wasnt obvious. I think the bigger worry would be that they would have to make sure that I dont take the gun and shot that sum'bitch Manson.
I know it's a brain dead hypothetical. The point it's supposed to make is that good people with guns are not what you have to worry about - so why is it that the anti-gun lobby denies this concept and instead chooses to push gun laws that would only affect those good people?
That's my problem.
Logical gun laws? Absolutely. Bring them on. Back ground checks? Yes please. I don't NEED a gun RIGHT NOW... I can wait a week. But banning concealed carry? Banning private ownership of firearms in general? Who does that protect? Not the good guys, I can promise you that.