Against such a threat people want someone to swoop in with a cure to save everyone.

Killing with a gun, however, is an act of human agency. Even the deaths attributed to negligence require a series of decisions that led to the consequence. In other words nobody wants to confront the idea that what we're dealing with is not a disease but a symptom of human free will. Can we cure free will? Should we even try?

The public won't answer in the way preferred by those who resent free will because it interferes with their personal ambitions so they have to use different imagery.

"Should we even try?" Since this country was founded on ideals completely counter to that type of activity, I say sure, give it a shot.

MSM and the anti-gun public health folks are two examples of 'when all you have is a Hemenway, everything starts to look like a noro' or something like that.

of the objects of prohibition. While there are health consequences attendant to the use of certain objects, drugs, foods, beverags, and behaviors, few of these cause "epidemics," and banning them rarely address those consequences. Sound and believeable education does more to reduce useage of a potentially hazardous material or stop a dangerous behavior.