There is no legal market for methamphetamine so what enables the illegal market? There is no legal market for prostitution (in most of the civilized world) so what enables the illegal market? If we extrapolate further; there is no legal market for murder, human trafficking, theft, etcetera so what enables these illegal markets?
The all-too-simple fact of the matter is that criminals are criminals BECAUSE THEY COMMIT CRIMES. Crimes are crimes because there are ILLEGAL. Making an act illegal, or a tool which may be used in an act, does not and cannot prevent crimes due to the fact that that is what criminals do.
It should be obvious that guns do not cause crime, and since something is not a crime if there is no law against it, I would argue that it is actually LAWS which cause crimes!

Well thought and articulated response (and as accurate as a .223 with match-grade ammo)
The level of 18th century firearms technology is of no more consequence to the question of second ammendment rights than computers versus manual printing presses under the first amendment. There should be no ambiguity about the intentions of the Founding Fathers in framing our "bill of rights" simply because they spelled them out. One needs only to read their writings (they were all prolific writers and very clear in their opinions and beliefs) to understand what they meant in the Constitution. In particular, the Federalist Papers lay their opinions out quite clearly.
Ignorance is inexcusable when knowledge is so easily obtained.

Do you have a point?

It's a lady moth.

I don't think there was anything inappropriate about @kamatsu's "nerds" comment. Firstly he/she was not referring specifically to any persons with any disability, but was referring to "nerds" in general; the fact that some who may be considered to be nerds may fall somewhere in the asd spectrum is merely coincidental. (At least that was my take)
Secondly, last time I looked "nerd" wasn't the epithet it once was. The dungeons and dragons crowd have grown up, embraced their nerdiness, and taken over the tech industry. Just because someone may be a nerd doesn't mean they are autistic, and if they're autistic it doesn't mean they are a nerd.
Thirdly, as a psychology student this is a theory I've not heard so I'm intrigued. No one in the behavioral sciences seems to be able to agree on any theory. They agree autism is more common but they tend to poo poo every possible explanation without giving an alternative.

So... The world is so complicated that some brains just short circuit?
I've not heard that theory. I shall have to research it.

"government as a scapegoat"

Yeah, it's tradition!

Exactly poke. Exactly.
I'll be one of the first to call someone out for stupidity, racism, etc. But I don't want to take away their rights to be idiots for fear that my rights to be an idiot might be next.

Basically^
I am operating under the assumption that this post is in reference to "Southern culture", considering what happened in Virginia. I neither defend nor condemn any Southerner's claim to their "heritage", nor am I even going to approach the wild charges of racism etc.
I, however, have a great fear for the future of my own rights if we allow others' rights to be dictated. Whether I agree with someone else or not, I know that any abridgment of their freedoms is but another step down a steep and slippery slope to the very fascism that the idiots at ANTIFA and others are protesting.

https://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/president
Looks like a landslide to me.

Not only is that statement incorrect and whites are far more likely to get shot by police than any minority, black officers are far more likely to shoot (regardless of the subject's skin color) than white officers. There have been a number of empirical studies in addition to mounds of anecdotal evidence that shows this.

Facts are not allowed on the interwebs.

Ok. You've always been reasonable so I'll accept that I may well have read too much.
Damn commies! Lol

I see "red flags" popping up like crazy whenever someone advocates for government involvement in areas our government was never designed to handle. I realize I'm in the minority here.

You rang?

No I didn't assume anyone would conclude it, mainly because today socialism is taught as a good thing (of course they don't call it socialism because it still sounds bad). As I said, I was simply drawing the idea out to its conclusion. "Equality" (of opportunity, not outcome) is all well and good, and something we certainly should have striven for in the civil rights era and should continue to uphold. However, when we stop relying upon ourselves to change our world, and allow or even demand our government to force social issues upon us, we have no rights any longer. I just wish more Americans could understand that allowing Washington more and more power leads nowhere but tyranny.