Great analogies for how I felt going into this article. Granted “need” is hmm not something I can say he proved, but much later in the article, he did prove the impracticality in the assault weapons ban conversation in that it doesn’t take into account the adaptability and versatile uses of this gun which could be why certain people do have it, and why otherwise reasonable people keep thinking you want their guns, when in fact, unbeknownst to us, we do — at least that one. I do believe there is or should be a sense of social/ communal responsibility when it comes to things that can be lethal quickly — like guns and cars. We do need to have an consensus and a willingness to abide by what may seem like restrictive or over the top rules, for the greater good. However, now I’m convinced, that responsible gun owners are the ones who should be making them — and that people like who who own an AR -15 should and “NEED” a place at the table to bring perspective and offer a probably more effective solution than some uninformed person like me calling my equally uninformed congressperson to “do something” with no direction.