@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:Intentional deaths should be excluded because they are caused by the presence of the killer, not by the presence of the gun.
Take away the guns, and murderers still commit murder.
..But are able to do so less effectively.
You can enter a bank in a robbery and start spraying around bullets, killing scores at a time. You can enter a school and start doing the same, if you are sickly inclined. The alternative, in either case, of approaching each individual and stabbing them to death one by one, all the while holding the other people present at bay, is just not able to go half as far.
I suppose you could kill someone with a nail file, if you really wanted to and are especially smart and skilled; but a big kitchen knife is more dangerous. Similarly, a handgun is more dangerous than even the biggest of kitchen knives, and an Uzi is more dangerous than a handgun. At what point does something become dangerous enough for regulation to step in? We have regulation on lead in paint, and that's far less able to cause death and mayhem.
To return to topic, at what becomes something dangerous enough to keep your eight-year old away from it, no matter how expert a guidance some random company is promising? You wouldn't allow your kid to start throwing steak knives, would you, whether or not you are at hand to hand him the knives and explain how or not? What kind of parent in heaven's name thinks, oh, an Uzi, cool, lets have my kid try it out?
