Yeah, I was scratching my head throughout that whole article, too.
I'm just beyond sick of the comparisons to cars (or knives, or bats, as my mom heard someone say recently) because, as has been noted over and over and over and over and over again, they have non-violent purposes. A car's main purpose is to transport us places. Knives can be used to cut food. Bats can be used to hit a ball with. Yes, people have used all three for murderous reasons, but THAT IS NOT WHAT THEY WERE INVENTED FOR.
A gun has ONE purpose, ONE thing it was invented to do: To injure/kill an animal or a person. Even if it's in self-defense and totally justifiable, you're still endangering someone's life or taking it away for good. That is ALL a gun is there for. So the regulations involving them are, by that very logic, going to be a little bit different from how we regulate the other compared objects.
This is, honest to God, NOT that freaking hard a situation to figure out. I do not understand why people are digging in their heels so much on this issue. Twenty young children died last month in one fell swoop in the most horrific, senseless way imaginable and that is still not enough for this country at large to demand change? That fact is honestly what frightens me the most about this whole debate, because I don't even want to imagine what that means it will take to smack some sense into people.