It's No Paradox

It's just a lack of actual common sense, or maybe hardcore dedication to denial of reality.

And yet it is still nutty to insist that the answer is more restrictions on more types of weapons. Of course, gun- control advocates are calling for such bans in part to protect civilians from each other -- to stop the next Sandy Hook or Aurora, for instance. There is both nobility and reason in such a rationale. Yet when gun rights advocates point out that the Second Amendment was created to protect against tyranny, and that we should thus be cautious in banning the weapons it guarantees us, we are once again treated to a host of claims as to how the Second Amendment is now irrelevant because the government is inarguably more powerful than the citizenry could ever hope to be. So the argument becomes at once both rational and confusing: we cannot compete against the military, but we can and should strip the populace of many firearms in order to protect ourselves from ourselves. Say what?

Go read it.