Reporter/camera man murdered.

[Esquilax]

It's an argument that can be made sure, I don't think it's a compelling one though when people are being massacred every year because of these few people's claim to need a gun to shoot coyotes or because they might come across a bear.

The thing is, you can tie the legal requirements for gun ownership to a demonstrated need for one. That's why the "everyone gets a gun because some people need a gun," logic fails. I believe that's how it works in Australia; you can procure a gun, but you need a demonstrable reason for owning one, and "I just want to have it around, looming over every moment because of a bizarre, ideologically motivated arms race my culture has been embroiled in for decades," is not a sufficient reason. You want it for hunting? Target shooting? Protection from wildlife? You got it. Want it to menace people or for no reason in particular? Nah.

There aren't any mass shootings in Aus, really, as a result. I feel like not having guns all over the place, saved for a rainy day or for weird, revolutionary revenge fantasies against a librul govermen' plays a big part in that. Not many people there even want a gun, as far as I know. There's not this desperate need to just have them. That's probably the big cultural change that needs to happen with America, disengaging guns from patriotism, turning them into less of a weird necessity, but honestly, I don't think "why do you need this deadly weapon?" is an unreasonable question to ask as a barrier of entry to gun ownership.