To everyone who is calling for stricter gun laws in light of the tragedy in Tucson, may I offer this little tidbit: If guns kill people, then pencils misspell words, cars drive drunk, and spoons make people fat. Remember: Hold the person accountable for their actions, not the means they chose to utilize!!! Repost if you agree.
Of course, stating the obvious, there's some truth to this statement. Obviously the user of the pencil causes the misspelling; obviously the user of the spoon is the one who is to blame for weight gain. Obviously the user of the automobile is the one who should be held accountable for driving under the influence. But the argument breaks down in significant ways. First, misspellings rarely cause death, or even injury; mostly it's embarrassing to the misspeller. Second, though weight gain has the potential to negatively affect the life of other people, the negative effect is felt by the person who is gaining weight.
So, since pencils and spoons don't have the potential to cause death or serious injury to other people, then we can set those aside for comparative purposes. Then we come to driving, which we can place alongside guns for comparison.
Remember, the government does regulate driving. You must be a certain age, and you must pass a test, in order to obtain the right to operate the deadly weapon known as an automobile. Further, there are laws which indicate that someone who is chemically impaired should not be driving, whether or not they have a valid license. Yes, some people break these laws and do drive drunk ~ but not many people believe that drunk driving should not be regulated.
If we have laws governing who is allowed to operate the deadly weapons known as cars, then we should have laws governing who is allowed to operate the deadly weapons known as guns. If there is a test that must be passed before operating a car, there should be a test that must be passed to operate a gun.
Cars do not drive themselves, and guns do not pull their own trigger. But if the government closely regulates the users of one, why are some people so afraid of having the government closely regulate the users of the other?
And that's saying nothing about the original intent of the authors of the 2nd amendment to the US Constitution, which was that we have the right to keep and bear single-shot, muzzle-loading, black-powder, match-lock muskets which were capable (in skilled hands) of firing up to four rounds per minute ~ the founding fathers could not conceive of automatic weapons capable of firing hundreds of rounds per minute when the Bill of Rights was written.