
Originally Posted by
David88vert
So, we shouldn't be proactive on baseball bat control to protect people from being murdered using baseball bats, but we should be proactive on gun control to protect people from being murdered using rifles? Even though more people get murdered with aluminum baseball bats than AK-47s? Does this seem logical or reasonable to you?
And it is clear that gun control legislation did not even have a realm of possibility to be introduced before the Newtown tragedy, and that the proposed legislation does nothing to begin to address preventing a tragedy, even though it has been carefully and strategically marketed using Newtown as a promoter.