Why is it completely ridiculous?  I didn't eat my dinner with a knife.  I hardly ever need a knife to eat dinner with.  Knives exist primarily to cut into things that's about it and most people who 'carry knives'  don't carry them just incase they need one for their dinner.

The current gun control 'debate' isn't just about having better oversight of gun sales.  It's absolutely about the government having more control over gun ownership.  That's precisely the point.    You have a belief that the government doesn't do any wrong and would never have ulterior motives which would be completely mis-guided and wrong and there are countless examples of this.

Nobody rational believes that gun laws passed today will necessarily equate to some governmental take over, tomorrow.  They believe in a very rational manner that the government cannot stop itself from trying to obtain more and more power and more and more control from a willing populace. The government is great at using (either advertently or inadvertently)  tragic situations as great platforms for pushing their agenda even when it completely tramples the rights of citizens.   Lastly,  people believe that gun control (much like 'Drug control' or the War on drugs) is an abysmal failure and there is evidence to suggest that gun control isn't the answer.  (Chicago anyone?)

They believe (correctly, I might add) that the reason for the 'Right to Bear Arms'  is soley in the constitution of this country to prevent governmental tyranny and for personal defense.   (And please don't say something like living in fear of your government is out-dated or impossible.)

The problem is self responsibility.  Stop blaming inanimate objects and start blaming the people committing the acts.   

People carry knives in case they want to cut or saw things.  But that doesn't necessarily mean "living things" as is the case with a gun and shooting things other than for target practice.  When I take a knife to work it's to cut open boxes, not people.  Basically, you've totally failed to support your claim that knives "exist primarily for murder", nor have you shown that guns don't. 

In your post above I've bolded baseless and false speculation about me.  However, I do believe that "the government" isn't a monolithic entity:  legislators who pass laws, for instance, aren't the same people and don't have the same agendas as the various executive branch agencies tasked with enforcing those laws. 

As for your argument that the government inevitably grasps for ever more power, it's not directly relevant.  Sure, if that is the case (and I believe it's closer to true than false) then we must be vigilant to make sure the government does not get power it shouldn't have, but that doesn't mean that the gun legislation recently proposed is such power.  The slope, if there be a slope, is not so slippery that we must stand in the way of reasonable laws now to prevent unreasonable laws in the future. 

How do universal background checks and more accurately tracking the sales of guns, perhaps for the purpose of cracking down on the 1% of sellers who are reportedly responsible for 50% of guns used criminally, "completely trample on the rights of citizens", and why do you believe it will "abysmally fail" to help against gun violence? 

I don't believe I ever said that gun violence was the fault of the guns and not the people shooting them; but guns are simply better for killing which is why people use them.  Therefore, making them harder to obtain for criminals would have the result of making it harder for them to kill.  I would be interested in hearing your argument that that is not a true statement, if such is your position. 

You are also incorrect if you believe the American people are against more gun regulation/control than currently exists.  See some poll results here. 

So what you're saying is,  Knives can be used to cut non living things but guns can't?  Why would I need to support my argument when you just did it for me.  They're both inanimate objects that serve different purposes than murdering human beings.

Legislators are mostly, hive-minded individuals that face extreme party pressure to fall in line.  So while they aren't the same entity as you want to claim, they are very easily manipulated into doing whatever is wanted from them.  You're also forgetting who is the final seal of approval for these laws and how many of these get rubber stamped.

I disagree.  The bleeding needs to be stopped somewhere.  You allow a slippery slope to occur and suddenly expect the population to magically start caring more?  It's not going to happen.  Every step away from freedom, is simply that.  Another step away from freedoms you had the day before.  Mind you, this doesn't just apply to guns.  

As we see in plenty of other places, more gun control does not mean 'more safety'.   What we're really looking for the latter not the former.  The problem is,  criminals have no problem making efforts to obtain weapons (Legally or illegally) in order to do  what they want to do.   It will abysmally fail like all other forms of restriction and control do.  It's not hard to understand why.  The only people that are usually punished are the law abiding citizens.  Take the example of a school zone.  Currently the speed limit is 25 MPH within this school zone.  Due to drivers constantly speeding through this school zone, the local government decides that it only makes sense to change the speed limit to 15 MPH within this school zone.   How does this effect the local community?  Are we safer?  Or are people still going to speed through that school zone?    One thing that we commonly see amongst people who use guns to committ murder,  is that they will go to any lengths necessary to obtain a weapon to murder.

I disagree with the notion that it makes guns harder to obtain for criminals.  Simply because,  I'm not sure why you believe it's so easy for criminals to obtain weapons today.  I mean, we have plenty of laws and restrictions already in place regarding purchases of firearms.  Secondly, if you're talking about 'Gun Show sales'  this too is mostly a misnomer and evidence has shown that Gun Shows don't necessarily contribute more or less to any crimes committed.  After all,  what if you're just a regular person prior to becoming a criminal, no check in the world is going to prevent that.   Additionally,  there exist way too many examples to completely nullify your points.   Weak Gun Law states have low gun murder rates,  Weak Gun law stats have high gun murder rates.  Conversely,  Strong Gun law states have super high gun murder rates.  There is far more than meets the eye with this discussion.  Let us keep in mind, the large drop in gun crimes for several years as well as the increasing gun ownership.

I never mentioned what the 'public wants' either.  The public as a whole wants to be coddled or wants what it wants at a specific moment in time. If the public was engaged, actively, numerous laws would never have passed that have in recent years.  Frankly,  outside of the tragedies there just isn't enough stout evidence to prove the point either way and when it comes to modifying our core rights,  I believe that should be the number one priority.