[ghshephard]

My argument is more along the lines of, "There is a list of things we should worry about. Somewhere, on that list is Y. Ahead of Y, there are 250 other things, that, if we really wanted to change the world for the better, make it safer for ourselves, and our children, we would focus on.

If we wish to act rationally, and make the world a better place, there will be far greater return on our effort, lobbying, and resources, to worry about items higher up on that list, as opposed to some incredibly unlikely events that will occur because of Y.

For some reason, Y grabs our attention though - and I was just trying to pull us all back to realizing, that, in the grand scheme of things, Y is irrelevant to the safety of ourselves, our children, and our community. As such, little to no effort should be put towards worrying about, or legislating Y."

[abraininavat]

I'm saying "I should worry about X" does not mean "X should be illegal." Clearly everyone should worry more about cars than this firearm. But the usefulness of X has to be weighed against its potential misuse.

[bmelton]

Without trying to sound condescending, a car is a far less useful tool for preventing invasion by an enemy nation-state or for defending against tyranny by our own government.

Just because you don't see the practical need for that utility does not negate that such utility exists and (in my opinion) is the express reason for the second amendment.