Many people have rightly pointed out that terrorism, being a tail risk, should not have such an out-sized influence on policy or lead to the erosion of civil ri

Many people have rightly pointed out that terrorism, being a tail risk, should not have such an out-sized influence on policy or lead to the erosion of civil rights. If that is your take-away from this article, good for you. Some people, including the article's author, then go on to argue that because of a different tail-risk (toddler's shooting people with guns) we should ban* all guns. This is a terrible argument. I am not saying there are no good arguments out there, I am saying this is not one of them. *Yes, I said ban. Guns are already regulated, no proposed legislation would prevent this incident, and bans are the explicit end goal of most pro gun-control groups[1] [1]http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4912 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4912