In any case, why do you still compare a knife, or cars, or anything of the sort, to a firearm?

They are dissimiliar in nature. A firearm is DESIGNED to kill, or injure, other humans or animals. That is its sole purpose. A knife, a baseball bat, anything of the sort are completely improvised weapons. The nature of knives and blunt objects is a whole nother ballpark and cannot be used in such a way as to argue "well why arent people getting riled up about banning knives". Because the comparison cannot be made. You dont need to make illogical arguments to get a point across. It was the belief of those people that while its impossible to stop psychos from doing these things that they could try to deter them by banning "assault weapons" (for which they had little idea of what they were actually doing). It was a stupid argument but so is the "why not (insert improvised weapon of choice)" rebuttal. Just say it. Banning assault weapons wont stop people from doing these things. And in the case of the loophole, closing it wont take away your right either.

Also, don't present loaded questions in your poll. Its obvious there's only one acceptable answer because it s a question designed for one answer and to make a poll is just irritating.

Very true. Any other answer is obfuscation. This is why the Second Amendment exists, and why we still need it today.