Mate, seems you didn't read my posts AT ALL, and it's an insult to me.
Please accept my apology. Your statement which I quoted was "the problem is not a gun, but psycho."
This reminds me so much of the typical statement that the NRA and gun lovers always seem to use: "Guns don't kill people, people do", which is as stupid as saying land mines don't kill people, people do. Or bazookas don't kill people, people do. Or cars don't kill people, people do.
I'll quote from another source that explains it much better than I could.:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/logical-take/201302/guns-don-t-kill-people-people-do
"Cars don't kill people; people kill people."
Obviously cars should not be illegal, but notice that this has nothing to do with the fact that they are proximate causes. Of course, they should be regulated; I shouldn't be allowed to go onto the highway in a car with no brakes. But all of that has to do what cars are for (they are not made for killing people), what role they play in society (it couldn't function without them), etc. It's a complicated issue—one to which pointing out that that cars are merely proximate causes to some deaths contributes nothing.
So clearly the argument under consideration, and any other argument that merely points out that guns are proximate causes (e.g., "stop blaming the guns and start blaming the person") is fallacious. Since people can't seem to agree on what fallacy such arguments employ, I would like to give a name to the mistake I have identified within them: "the fallacy of mistaking the relevance of proximate causation."
So, should all guns be illegal? After all, like the bazooka, they do make killing people in mass easier to accomplish. Then again, like cars, using them for mass murder is not their intended function. Most people agree that they should at least be regulated (at the least, most think that
all gun sales should require a background check). But how strictly should they be regulated? Perhaps very strictly.
After all, states with stricter gun regulations have fewer gun related deaths. Then again, there may be philosophical issues related to the protection of liberty that trump such utilitarian concerns. It’s a complicated issue.
And that’s my point: It’s a complicated issue. There are lots of relevant factors involved, but the fact that guns are proximate causes isn't one of them. So the next time quotes the NRA slogan, "Guns don't kill people; people kill people," in an attempt to end a discussion about gun control, do me a favor: point out that they have “mistaken the relevance of proximate causation,†pause briefly to enjoy the confused look on their face, and then patiently explain the fallacy to them.
