>>We don't need scientists to tell us that stepping off a 1000 foot cliff will kill us, or that we should drink water if we're thirsty.

Yes, but that's sophistry and false equivalence.

>>If the ban just keeps one weapon out of circulation it has paid for itself.

That relies on willfully ignoring the examples where there's zero, nada connection between semi-auto weapons and violent crime. As I keep saying, in science the animal is always right no matter how obvious our expectations might be. And since the animal didn't do what you say last time, why do you keep saying it's obvious that it will this time?

>>One other hand there is not a single argument in favor of selling these weapons to civilians.
>>There aren't many actions in life that might help and can't possibly hurt.
>>We should take them when they present themselves.

You're saying it's more important to do something than to be sure you're doing the right thing?

A wise man once observed that the only wrong decision is not to make one... but you're a smart dude, don't you want to help make sure that decisions get made with the highest chance of success, rather than the highest personal comfort?

>>We just saw hundreds of millions of people adoringly looking up at a so-called model wife who failed miserably in her first marriage and who claims to be a feminist while eagerly marrying into the epitome of patriarchal hierarchies.

LOL. God Bless our Gracious Queen!