Buying a gun for protection is usually for the mathmatically challenged

[beardown]

24. Simple solution that ignores complexity of overall issue

It's sounds so simple. Too many gun deaths? Eliminate guns.
Too many car deaths? Eliminate cars.
Too many drunks? Eliminate booze. Ironically, prohibition propelled the mobs into supersized, massively funded, city controlling organizations and helped spike the murder and gun murder stats up.
Too many rapes? Eliminate men. I don't mean shoot them. Just put them in internment camps like we did the Japanese. I mean, if it prevents one rape you know.

Quick and simple solutions do not exist for gun violence. By the way, gun violence is going down and has been for years once the second major prohibition (war on some drugs ) and the hike in the number of young men from the baby boomers subsided anyway. Drunk driving deaths are way down and without confiscating cars or booze, although there have been major erosion of Constitutional rights.

How many deaths are you willing to accept if the govt decided to confiscate all guns? If it's more than zero, than you are making a similar value judgement that many lawful and well regulated gun owners do when they decide to own a gun, ergo if you are willing to accept deaths to meet your goal then we are both making the same decisions, but just on different points on the scale.

Not meant to be insulting. I just don't accept gun banning as a viable solution for a supposedly democratic nation. Every post or day spent pursuing this 'goal' takes energy and time away from viable real world solutions.