Posted without comment from today's LA Times:

[petronius]

22. The analogy is fine; the 'thing' in question doesn't matter

The point is that it's reasonable and desirable in any arena (including but not limited to firearms) to expect those who advocate regulations, policies, or restrictions on items, components, features, activities, etc to have a basic understanding of the thing they wish to regulate.

(And as an aside, it's a fallacy to state that guns are designed 'only to kill' - there are myriad applications of firearms that have nothing to do with killing...)