Nice Liberal Arguments about banning guns are totally incoherent. Oh, oh, 10,000 people died in "gun violence" last year? Yeah, well, there were 33,000 traffic accidents. I say we ban automobiles and tear up the highways. There were almost 700,000 deaths from heart disease. I say we all subsist on saltless bread and distilled water. In fact, I think the epidemic of mortality afflicting the human race represents the gravest threat to our species. I suggest we all kill ourselves in order to prevent avoidable death, that affliction.
The idea that the Second Amendment, uniquely in the Bill of Rights, does not apply to individuals is obviously crazy. Would a liberal ever make such an argument about the First Amendment? Oh, yeah, uh, well, it only means that the federal government can't engage in censorship; that's not to say that Chicago can't ban people from saying "persimmon!" in public or agitating against the legitimate reign of the aldermen. What? If you think that guns are so bad that they should only be owned by the government, then I suggest you 1.) check your premises regarding the entity that engages in the most "gun violence" and 2.) repeal the Second Amendment. Oh, is that not feasible? I wonder if there is a lesson in that? I mean, last night I actually fell out of Ardha Baddha Padmottānāsana when NPR interviewed some police chief who said that police were getting out-gunned by civilians (BTW, are police not civilians?), citing as an example the deaths by gun of several dozen cops last year. Yeah, well, how many "civilians" (and dogs!) were killed by police?