I really think that's nonsense. Guns are specifically designed to kill. They are weapons. That's why I own them. So I can kill an intruder or assaulter. So I can protect myself. I could own a BB gun if all I was interested in was target practice. Yeah, I've enjoyed target practice but that is certainly not the purpose of the weapon. Not the reason they were created and not the reason arms are named in our constitution.
Guns are weapons. Lethal, lethal weapons, specifically designed to kill an animal or person. That is their purpose. Thus, an extraordinarily high level of caution must be taken when handling, cleaning, using or storing them. And they need to be strictly regulated.
People like to compare guns to cars a lot. The make-up in the car argument, for example. Well guess what? The use of cars is, indeed, heavily regulated. The use of guns is arguably not (not as much).
There are age limits for ALL vehicles, speed limits, universal limits on combining cars with alcohol, drugs, etc. We must have a license to drive that involves actually studying and passing a test showing we know the laws and how to use the vehicle. We have to register the vehicle every year. We must have insurance in order to operate the vehicle. If we use the vehicle negligently or recklessly, or allow a child to use it, such is not brushed off as a "mistake". We are punished by law.
What about the little five year old Kentucky kid who shot his two year old sister dead with a loaded child's weapon (My First Rifle), that had been just leaning against the wall? There were zero charges in that case. The yokel coroner handling the death simply stated in awe: "It's a little rifle for a kid ... The little boy's used to shooting the little gun."
Wait, what? It's as if he doesn't get how a "little" rifle is just a capable of killing as a big one. He acted as if it was a toy and as if it was totally shocking that it could actually be used to end a life.
That death should've been labeled negligent homicide.