Look, it’s plainly obvious that you need nothing more than a rock or a piece of wood and you can go kill quite a few people. There are quite a few very sharp knives in the kitchen drawer here at work and I am certain I could take one of them and ride the lifts here for a while and kill no end of people.
But there are no guns in the office. Because sharp knives are generally made for the purpose of cutting up food. And guns are made for killing things. Yes, you can collect them as objects of workmanship and handcraft or you can go shoot at paper targets or clay pigeons. But their prime reason for being made is to kill things. Whether you’re a bad guy robbing a bank or a good guy protecting his family.
It is desperately important to get some common ground in matters such as these or people will just talk past each other. So although it shouldn’t be necessary for me to say that I do not support a firearms confiscation I will confirm that. If you want to own a gun (you personally), then I support your right.
That is based on a few assumptions, naturally. That you are not mentally ill and have no convictions for violence being two of those.
So that is the ‘step in the right direction’ I meant. That we can both agree that if someone has been convicted of beating his wife and infant child, then he has lost the right to own a firearm. Now what other criteria we could agree on for a person to lose his right to gun ownership can be discussed in a reasonable manner. At some point we are going to part ways, but that’s the nature of the discussion.