Wow. Tens of thousands dead. "no problem".
There's more ways to murder someone than with a firearm.
If the murder rate in the USA upsets you then I'd suggest looking for motivations, law enforcement, and all kinds of other places before looking a gun control to lower the murder rate. Also, there's more to violent crime than murder, there's battery, assault, rape, and more. I'd expect a good way to reduce rape is having more armed women. Because the USA is so large and has states with variation in gun laws that it would be enlightening to look at which states have the most restrictions on firearm ownership and violent crime rates. As part of a statistics assignment at university I made a statistical analysis between violent crimes and restrictions on firearm ownership, states with the most restrictive gun laws tended to have the highest violent crime rates. Do note that this was on all violent crime, not just "gun crime" like the Brady Campaign likes to do.
I guess drug overdoses and road deaths are no problem for you either.
I believe that prohibitions on some drugs is playing out a lot like the prohibitions on alcohol a century ago. People without access to drugs that are sold under government supervision and regulation only leads people to seek black market drugs with varied potency and potentially containing poisons. I'd expect that if we were allowed to run some experiments on this we'd find that prohibition leads to far more deaths than would be seen if we hadn't taken drugs like laudanum off the market.
I'm not sure what to think about automobile deaths. Stuff happens and we can't bubble wrap the world. People play stupid games with cars and they can get stupid prizes as a result. We've gone a long way to make automobiles safe, at some point it's all down to people doing stupid things and random chance events we can't do much to prevent. I guess this applies to drugs also, some people do stupid things, and sometimes there's random chance events we can't do much about.
Until it happens to a loved one.
I've lost loved ones. I'd rather not talk about it.
Suicides "no problem" until you find your son with his brains blown out?
As if removing firearms would remove the means and motives of suicide. I can recall a recent local case of suicide where someone stepped out into rush hour traffic. I have a problem with that, as I would with any suicide, I just don't see how removing firearms would have kept this troubled person from suicide by automobile. I can recall Japan having problems with suicide, and there's very restrictive rules on firearm ownership, yet people there still find a way. If the fix to suicide is removing access to firearms then what is next? Remove automobiles so people can't step out into traffic?
How do you get so callous to the suffering of others?
How can you be so callous to remove effective medications from people in need of them?
If someone wants cold medicine that is better than a placebo then they need to visit a physician, and that costs money. Given the bullshit from the DEA crawling around looking for reasons to lock up physicians on bullshit charges of peddling drugs it can mean a physician could be reluctant to prescribe anything but what is over the counter, as in a patient is having a real hard time with a bad cold or flu but the physician refuses to offer anything but over the counter shit. So people suffer, and they have to pay for a visit to a physician on top of that. Even if the physician agrees to prescribe something useful for their ailments then that's money spent on a visit for something that should be over the counter, something that was over the counter until people without medical training decided to limit access to medications that have been deemed safe and effective by the FDA.
We don't have a drug abuse problem in the USA, we have a problem of a government getting in between physicians and their patients. We have DEA agents, people with no medical training, charging physicians with prescribing "too much" of controlled substances. Of course the DEA won't tell anyone how much is "too much" because if they did then they'd know there would be little for the DEA to do, we'd see physicians following the DEA rules so as to avoid arrests in the future. If the goal was to keep people safe then the DEA should be publishing guidelines on prescriptions for all to see than leave everyone guessing. It's not the DEA's job to keep people safe from drug abuse, their job is to justify their existence as a law enforcement agency distinct from the FBI by making some arrests.
Then we get to the ATF, their job is to justify their existence by arresting people for "moon shining" and possessing firearms without serial numbers. I question the value in most anything the ATF does. I recall the ATF runs a top notch arson lab and I'd hate to see that go, but the rest the ATF does is likely not helping us in reducing the deaths and injuries to innocent people and therefore is wasted tax revenue that could be put to better use elsewhere.
I believe there was a certain Dr. Franklin that warned us of trading liberty for safety. The government doesn't exist to make us safe, that is our own responsibility. The government is there to do a lot of things, bubble wrapping the nation is not part of the government mandate.