>Any attempt to ban firearms in the United States would result in more death and injury than the problems it is intended to solve.
This is a very generous assumption. I instead assume that the problem that it intends to solve is "how does a government crank down hard on its citizens so that they become some sort of Stalinesque serfs who have no power and those which survive mindlessly obey"... in that scenario, gun prohibition isn't just a good idea but probably a necessary precondition.
For obvious reasons, even if gun control advocates are privy to that reasoning, public relations demands that they not say that part out loud.
This is a very generous assumption. I instead assume that the problem that it intends to solve is "how does a government crank down hard on its citizens so that they become some sort of Stalinesque serfs who have no power and those which survive mindlessly obey"... in that scenario, gun prohibition isn't just a good idea but probably a necessary precondition.
For obvious reasons, even if gun control advocates are privy to that reasoning, public relations demands that they not say that part out loud.