> Because many people need a car to function (get to work, shops, take kids to school).
I'm not sure that's a compelling argument. One could easily counter that people could move to be closer to work and/or school. Cars are "needed" because of the life choices people make.
> Nobody needs a gun to function.
If we apply consistent logic, there are people who need guns to function just as much as others need cars. Folks who live in the wilderness of Alaska and make a substantial living off the land need guns to hunt animals and acquire food. Sure they could hunt with a bow, but people could also get to work on bicycles.
Even people who NEED a car have to be licensed to operate one, and there are consequences if you use one without. Perhaps people should be licensed to have guns as well?
There's also a lot of studies into car safety. Perhaps it would make sense to spend some money studying gun safety, as well?
The Alaska/hunting point is a good one - I fully agree here. I think what a lot of people disagree with is the laws allowing possession of an AR-15 assault rifle and it's kin
