Originally Posted by Gutless Drunk
I see this car accident argument often. The difference, of course, is the automobiles primary design utility is transportation, while the guns primary design utility is to kill. If you can't see why this comparison is not valid, you are clueless.
If this is a subject you are passionate about I suggest you come up with a less intellectually dishonest argument then this crap.
possibly the best post in 18 pages. Its amazing that a tragedy like this cannot at least open the dialog for smarter gun regulation. Everyone assumes that the desired outcome is to just get rid of guns altogether. Hardly. There is a happy medium where is there is a meaningful reduction (but unfortunately not elimination) of these tragedies and law abiding citizens can have guns. Just like with other behaviors, incentives can be provided for or against those activities.