Honestly, at this point, maybe it really would be easier

If you need new kidneys it’s much easier for the surgeon if they just put you on dialysis and or medication the rest of your life isn’t it? They get what they want, you still get to live, everyone wins right? No. Your quality of life is impacted by that. If your kidneys fail through no fault of your own, your doctor is too lazy to treat you correctly, and you are expected not to fight against that... you might be upset no? Responsible gun owners didn’t create a problem and they don’t want to be punished for it. Most are willing to discuss reasonable compromises but are outraged by those who are like you- too lazy to even try to accommodate their rights and their wants, writing off their feelings on the matter as irrelevant because it’s too hard to try to respect them in the process.

I don't think that was the point...

I don’t think that was their point either. People often say more, and things more telling, than they intend to if we listen carefully to what they say. Their point shows that they do not understand the fundamental issue. The REASON it’s hard to regulate guns is... people. People who want guns. The primary forces in this debate are human ones, and emotional drives. Those who feel safer without guns, those who feel less safe without guns. Both have valid points to make, but this statement and how flippant it is show clearly this person doesn’t respect the other position, and that lack of respect and understanding make collaboration hard. Thusly, it becomes much harder to implement gun control when you aren’t collaborative with the other side of the table, and engender adversarial relations.

Or... crazy idea.... have a real driving test? In most of the developed world you can’t just pop in to the DMV and take a 10 minute test for $25 and leave a full fledged driver. In parts of Europe a license takes a year of training, with skilled instructors. Thousands of dollars, and unlike here where a person with many, many violations can be back driving again- you mess up, you lose it. You have to demonstrate knowledge f the physics and dynamics behind how a car behaves. In Australia, you get tiered licenses which you display via placard in the car. Driving at night, on freeways, etc. require certain licenses. At the very least we should require special licenses for cross over and SUV type vehicles.

Ones which have generally high centers of gravity, poor dynamic safety, under braked, over powered, and weighing often 4,000lbs plus. We let people drive who lack the skills or even the desire to be good drivers and then gasp in shock when we have huge fatalities. What’s worse perhaps is that seeing these numbers we say the only answer must be to put as many nannies as we can and make rolling bank vaults so that when these people inevitably hit something they can walk away with an insurance payout and be back on the road with little consequence save increased premiums. More or less if you can afford insurance you can be as terrible a driver as you like.

The kinetic energy behind a car is greater than what any gun you can buy can generate. Do the math on 2700+lbs of steel rolling along at 30-60mph, and unlike guns they are everywhere in the open all day. Where you and your family live, shop, work and play. But driving is a privilege not a right. So where are the background checks and waiting periods on cars and licenses? Where are the mandatory training classes and 0 tolerance and all that? It’s funny how when something inconveniences a person they tend to feel regulation isn’t warranted, but when it’s something that doesn’t directly effect their lives they are all for safety at the expense of personal rights

... and do t get me started on things like heart disease which is a number one killer of Americans. Largely preventable, and yet.... background checks for McDonald’s or fitness exams for the all you can eat buffet or waiting periods on deep fried Oreos doesnt appeal to people. Restricting the choices they can make about their bodies in the name of public well being doesn’t appeal to people when it’s delicious. “That doesn’t hurt others..” we could go on about that- but it can hurt kids no? Parents giving them junk or letting them be unhealthy? What if the state could take your kids for giving them too many sweets or having them fail a fitness and physical exam? Not appealing is it?