I’m still amazed that he is tacitly implying that an NFL linebacker couldn’t have killed a 120 lb woman without a gun.
Yes, and it gets even stupider than that. For example:
“He said, ‘How many of you guys own a gun?’ And roughly 65 hands went up. Even if all those guns were obtained legally, you can’t have 65 guys in their 20s and 30s, aggressive young men, subject to impulses without something bad happening.”
As if there are not millions upon millions of 20-30 something young men in America who own guns without something bad happening.
Then, there’s this nugget:
“Give me one example of an athlete. I know it has happened in society. But give me one example of a professional athlete who by virtue of his having a gun took a dangerous situation and turned it around for the better. I can’t think of a single one.”
Why would he even proffer that argument unless he means to imply that professional athletes should be excluded from firearms ownership?