IMHO, that's an unsuccessful attempt to rephrase "Guns don't kill people. People kill people."

You could argue that that's technically true in the sense that one can kill another with just a/b anything they can get their hands on. Or that one can kill with one's bare hands alone. But in the practical and humane sense, guns are deadlier and more proficient than anything or any other handheld weapon one might use. A single shot .22 can kill with more efficiency than a knife, an arrow or bolt, or the afore mentioned stick or stone.

So excepting military or law enforcement, why would anyone need the hyperbolically enhanced efficiency of assault weapons and/or high capacity mags? They don't unless inflicting death or injury on as many as possible or desired is the goal.

Think a/b it, Dave. In that context, it's obscene to classify a gun as a tool. Tools are perceived as positive, constructive, efficient, etc. Adding value as it were. Is a gun a tool for the hunter or sportsman? Maybe. But we're not talking a/b hunters and sportsmen. We're talkin a/b murderers sane or insane. And in that sense, a gun adds zero value.

Oh, and don't get me started on self-defense. Without hundreds of hours of training, without finely-honed skill and laser-accurate judgement, the risk of wrongful or accidental death is yet greater. I hold my own narrowly avoided experience up as chilling proof.
_________________________