Gun Control: Saving Us From Ourselves

I'm trying to set aside my emotions on the matter. I'm trying to understand, in an unbiased way, why those that follow liberal politics want to control guns. What is the logic in reducing the number and type of guns available to law abiding citizens?

I took my information from the comment section under Politico's Should Military Gun Rules Be Eased. There was plenty of rudeness and high emotions on both sides of the argument, but once I managed to sort through things, the running theme in favor of gun control is to reduce the availability of guns for criminals, the insane, and the suicidal by making them unavailable for purchase by anyone, including the law abiding and emotionally stable.

Said LiberalXaltotun:
The top 10 states for per-capita firearms deaths are also the top 10 states for firearm ownership.

The bottom 10 states for per capita firearms deaths are also the bottom 10 states for firearm ownership.

Sure, let's make sure more people have guns. Brilliant

Gumpchun:

copyright Florida Today, by Jeff Parker

The bad TV-show-generated fallacy that ubiquitous guns means less violence is laughable, statistically bogus and utterly false.

More guns equals more dead soldiers. More guns on our streets means more dead Americans.

Even a child knows that. Having even grandmas packing heat so that every dispute, misunderstanding, grievance or show-and-tell is between people armed to the teeth with the ability to kill again and again is no prescription for safety.

Never was, never will be.

Rick W4:
I doubt there are many current or retired (like me) service members who want folks walking around bases/posts with loaded weapons. Weapons are for using against the enemy, in combat, not at home. I served on active duty for 25 years and only touched firearms for training or deployment purposes. There is no protection against a deranged person who is willing to sacrifice his life to commit a criminal act. The notion of more guns equals more protection is absurd. More guns only increases the opportunity for tragedy.

Of course these were just opinions. None of them had any attached substantiating links.

The problem I see with the argument of taking away the weapon is it doesn't resolve the reason why one person would want to kill himself or another.

No one commits murder or suicide just because he has a gun. It's a problem of the human heart (or the mind as is often the case), and taking away one weapon would only lead humanity to seek other weapons. Remember, guns are a relatively recent innovation in weapons technology. For most of recorded human history we've killed each other and ourselves with knives, swords, arrows, spears, rocks, poisons, farm and fishing equipment, even our bare hands.

Passion is inherent in human nature. No doctor has fully succeeded in drugging away our darker feelings, and no politician has yet drafted a law against death that we've been willing to follow. Until such time, we take a risk with every moment that it may be our last. Accept it.