But what would people hunt with?
Are you declaring that hunting should cease? What about animal population control?
Are you saying that we should allow deer and coyote populations to grow so out of control that the number of animal-car collisions becomes an epidemic (with the ancillary increase in insurance premiums for all drivers) and then allowing for mass animal die offs due to food shortages that completely upend the local ecosystem?
And I didn’t even mention the coyotes killing pets and livestock and potentially spreading diseases like rabies, mange, heartworm, distemper, and parvovirus.
Or deer spreading chronic wasting disease, which is already a massive issue, until they just don’t exist anymore, and probably infect some people at some point in the future. (CWD is similar to mad cow disease.)
It’s awful that 13,000 people were killed… but what about the other 299,987,000+ guns that didn’t kill anyone? It’s a classic “a few bad apples” scenario.
Your belief is like me saying “humans are terrible for whales! To save the whales, we have to kill all the humans, whether they’ve ever harmed a whale or not!”
Have you harmed a whale?
It’s fine for you to feel the way you do. Really. But melting down all guns wouldn’t stop violence. Violence is in human nature.
You might lower the successful murder rate, but people will still try to kill people. People will still rape people (who wouldn’t have lethal means of defense anymore). People will still fight, and steal, and abuse their spouses and kids.
Guns really don’t have much to do with it in the big picture, because around the world, even where guns are highly regulated, there is rape, and abuse, and fights, and murder, and theft. It can’t be stopped.
So where are you moving to? I’m just curious.