A letter-to-the-editor response to the saying "Guns don't kill people; people kill people"

This morning, I stumbled across the following letter-to-the-editor in The Columbus-Dispatch:

"Guns aren’t problem; laws and people are

I respond to the March 23 Forum column “NRA seems to be running out of goals,” by Gail Collins. I want to reiterate the observation that guns don’t kill people. People kill people. Guns very often are used to save lives.

A few years ago, some people were enjoying a meal at a restaurant in Florida. Suddenly, two punks with guns entered and took money from the register and from patrons. They then proceeded to force all the people into a cooler, and lock them in.

One customer had a gun and shot both assailants. Perhaps Collins should have been there to engage in small talk with strangers, while in total darkness.

In another example, my wife and I were traveling north on I-77 on a Sunday afternoon. I immediately noticed a reward poster concerning a man who had been murdered there just two weeks earlier. Apparently the victim had no gun.

Some years back in a town in Texas, a woman was having dinner with her parents. Suddenly, a deranged man entered and killed 16 people, including the parents.

The woman did have a gun, in her car outside. Apparently the state of Texas did not trust the average person to carry a gun. Now, if Collins had been a patron there, at that time ...

Again, I say guns don’t kill people; people kill people.

EUGENE HYRB

McConnelsville"

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/editorials/2012/04/03/guns-arent-problem-laws-and-people-are.html

As I so often times do, I decided to respond. Here is my rather short reply to the letter:

This letter-to-the-editor is in response to the April 3rd letter entitled, "Guns aren't problem; laws and people are," written by one Eugene Hyrb. 

Mr. Hyrb reiterated the tired line (twice in fact) "Guns don't kill people; people kill people." He then gave three examples of when victims or potential victims to a gun-related crime were or could have been better served if they too were armed. 

I admit, the before-mentioned phrase is a short and catchy one. It's easy to remember and is perfect for a bumper sticker. However, while I don't support the notion that guns by themselves kill people, I also think it's kind of ridiculous to solely blame the person for gun-related crimes and not believe the gun had anything to do with it.

In basketball, do we say, "It's not the ball that scores, it's the person"? Without the ball in hand, how would the player then score? While the ball won't just score by itself, it will need for someone to direct it toward the basket in order to do so. Similarly, when it comes to guns, it'll be awfully difficult for a person to shoot and injure or kill someone without the device. It's not the ball that scores the basket nor is it the person; it's the person with the ball that scores the basket. Similarly, it's not the gun that kills people nor is it the person; it's the person with the gun that kills people. Well, I best be off to try and disprove my logic by playing some basketball and scoring without having possession of the ball. Wish me luck!

Source: The left-side of the brain