>>18794795
I don't necessarily agree fully with him but I see the point he's making. There's trade-offs and cost-benefits to every policy. If we keep guns legal there will inevitably be innocent people dying to guns. You can make the same observations for cars and knives. Cars are essential for modern society and enabling economic productivity and personal freedom, yet society accepts the trade-off that there will be innocent lives lost due to inevitable car accidents. Letting everyone own knives means that there will inevitably be innocent people who die due to stabbings, but society accepts that the benefits of letting everyone have knives as tools justifies the costs of those lives lost. Kirk is merely making the same argument that the cost of innocent people inevitably dying to guns is worth the societal benefits of the right to self-defense and the deterrence of tyrany. Whether you agree with that or not isn't really the point, the point is the issue is much more nuanced than just "he doesn't care about school shootings so why should I care about his death". It really just boils down to how much you value armed self-defense and personal autonomy.
