As I said elsewhere, Australia's homicide rate remained basically unchanged after their restrictions in 1996.

The problem with this argument is it's like saying restrictions on free speech or more lax warrant requirements are fine because we're not totally restricting free speech, and we still sometimes require a warrant. I mean, I get that some people may disagree with the 2nd Amendment's presence in our constitution, but the whole point of having a constitution in the first place is because we don't want the government to be able to pick and choose. You can't applaud the First, Fourth, Fifth, whatever amendments but then say we should ignore the Second.

I'm fine with some more restrictions on gun ownership/purchasing within reason, but that's not what I was talking about. The President's statements are that we should be able to arbitrary restrict a constitutional right based on associations with people we don't like. Sure, Daesh is pretty much the worst. But what happens when someone down the road says "remember how bad Daesh was? Well, these Communists/Liberals/Gays/Transgendered/Blondes are just as bad!"