But disallowing access to, say, semi-auto rifles and high-capacity magazines isn't taking away your rights. By your logic, any ban on any class of firearm is denying you your rights. So are you going to rail agains the tyranny of bans against full-fledged machine guns, then?
Yes, most gun violence is committed with handguns. That's an issue that requires a multi-faceted solution, such as making access more difficult to those who shouldn't have guns, not to mention socioeconomic changes (better education and job opportunities, for example). But the problem is that mass shooters gravitate toward long guns precisely because they're ideal for killing many humans quickly, and thus lead to casualties that would've been entirely avoidable. Tell me, do you think the Las Vegas shooter would've killed 58 people and injured hundreds more if he'd been firing a pistol from that hotel room?
The hilarious thing is that you're
still lying (and it is an intentional, malicious lie) that we want to ban all guns. We don't want to ban all guns; we will not turn 80 million people into criminals overnight. There certainly aren't 80 million people who own semi-auto rifles. In fact, an NSSF
estimate has 15 million to 20 million guns in that class in circulation, and that includes law enforcement. Given that some people own more than one, the actual percentage of Americans who own those guns is relatively small.
Here's what I think: ruling out any consideration of gun control legislation is simplistic and cowardly. It shows a fundamental ignorance of how gun control is proven to work in other countries that still embrace democracy and freedom of expression. Yes, the US is a different beast, but you're never going to improve things if your attitude remains "no matter what, do nothing."