Ben, I quite enjoy you as a human being, but there's a point where I can't follow your feelings, and I'd like to express it here. I feel like bombs and other home made weapons at least present a certain barrier to entry that guns don't. No toddler is going to accidentally build and detonate a C4 or similar explosive. No cavedwelling creton who lacks basic intelligence will be successful attempting to follow more complex construction or scientific steps that are a part of building weapons. I could download the Anarchist's cookbook and make whatever any time I want but I can't be arsed to. Yes, for those who intend to commit mass killings, these factors won't stop them. But there are other pieces involved if we are talking about just gun deaths in America.
I'm not even against sensible gun policy. Mandatory background checks? I can dig that. Registrations? I can dig that too. I'm for the sensible regulation of any and all potentially hazardous materials and objects. What I am against is un-nuanced positions like a complete prohibition on firearms. I firmly believe that over the long term, more lives will be saved by identifying those with violent antisocial potential and somehow addressing the threat that they pose. That process will take a long time, but I'm fairly certain that we have the technology and resources to do such a thing, if it were made a priority. Here's an analogy that made a lot of sense to me. For a long time, big cats were a serious problem for Homo Sapiens. We couldn't see them coming most of the time and they would specifically target our young and unsuspecting members. Because this was a big enough problem, we started killing big cats. Now there are only big cats where we permit big cats to live. They kill some people, but it's a comparatively low number and nobody is particularly bothered by that fact.