Arggg! Once again as I've spent ten minutes typing, poof all gone, and I must start over.

Your dismissal of things that sound like they came from the NRA is an example of the problem of partisan (that's not just political parties, but all ideologies) demonization of "other." Some of what they have to say is true. They are also, by far, the best source of firearm safety material and training for civilians. A significant number of people are abandoning the NRA and joining less compromising organizations like the GOA which are all about the political, like the NRA's ILA.

Most people are practical in seeking efficiency or ease. Certainly, it is easier to kill someone or yourself with a firearm. They are not required. We adopted my niece when she was orphaned as a result of my sister-in-law being brutally beaten to death (fists and feet) by her boyfriend. I doubt that gun prohibition would end suicide or violent crimes of passion.

I think that nature vs. nurture is more of a ration than an absolute. Some say that gendered traits are a social construct. There is probably some truth in it. China has banned actors and entertainers who are "sissified" because they think it contributing to the feminization of Chinese men. Having said that, I think that men are inherently more prone to violence than women. Taking tools away won't change that either. It might reduce the number of "weak" boys, bullied by the school's jocks, from taking a gun to school, but as sensationalized as such events are, they are rare. And of course there are other tools https://tinyurl.com/2ps39486

We require training and/or testing to drive a car and I am in favor of training and testing to go out and about with firearms. I am far too liberal to support "need" as a requirement.