If you are going to quote me, don't mislead the context (this is how many of the nutters work for example, by part quoting) - I'm sure you know I said what the Pro Gunners would say - it is definitely not the way I think.
Now, separately, the content of your post demonstrates the irrational thought process and attempts to clutch at straws by trying to equate death by gun to death by other means:
e.g. Car, Food, Bad Food, Hotel Balconies, Roller Skates
Are you serious? Your content is Alex Jones-like - irrational.
Firstly, the shooting massacres of recent times are not "accidents". How many massacres involve killing by those items you listed? Guns stand out. We also know that planes (on your list) have been used as a tool by terrorists and hence the attempts to screen people at airports. Also, in the US, many schools have metal detectors in an attempt to prevent students bringing in knives (from your list).
You and pro-gunners clutch to the argument that guns don't kill - that people do and therefore, target people instead (by training them???). What you are suggesting, in terms of not banning anything sounds like a formula for anarchy.
Now if you want to go down the path of blaming the people, not the guns (or tools as you argue), it means that society needs to keep a closer watch on the people => how would you suggest society does this???? Hint just for you - this is a leading question.
Finally, in relation to the second amendment, the Pro-gun argument is for owning guns in case of a govt/elite tyranny. However, I imagine many people in the US own guns now, for protection against other people (I probably would too) - crazies who should not own guns - who are a threat to society, especially while in possession of a gun.
So the goalposts of the second amendment claims for gun ownership, might have actually moved for many people...
