I don't have any strong opinions on guns or Islam. Neither play any significant role in my life, or the lives of those around me, so why should I care? But what is fascinating to me is how logically contradictory the position of people on either sides of this argument are.
The same people that are so defensive of [Islam], are the same people that are so strongly apposed to [guns]
Now reread that sentence and replace
"guns" with
"Islam". So one group believes that we should be able to impinge on the rights of the majority in the name of public safety, because of the actions of a minority. And, the other groups also believes that we should be able to impinge on the rights of the majority in the name of public safety, because of the actions of a minority.
The logical position, is that you either believe the state should be able to impinge on the rights of a majority in the name of public safety because of the behaviour of a minority, or you don't.
But yes, I hear you say. Islam is a religion and a guns are a constitutional right. Religion trumps constitutional rights surely? (unless you're white Christian of course, in which case it's evil) Really.... So I guess secularism wasn't a good thing then...?
But Muslims are people and guns are objects. Muslims are people as are gun owners. A gun is an object, as is the Quran. Whatever significance your brain places on either object is your own personal perception and interpretation.
The fact is, the distinction is irrelevant as both groups are highly delusional. One group believes that a "well armed militia" can overthrow the US military complex should it one day (not said with a hint of irony) become tyrannical. The other group think we should all follow to the letter a book that written 1400 years by a man called Mohammed who had the content directly dictated to him by God.