You are wrong for the following reason. I don't need to see, be around, or be used to something to have good reason to fear it. By your logic, you should be as afraid of all the weapons you've never seen as much as the anti-gunners are afraid of guns. Also, if you're not afraid of something that can easily kill you in an instant, then there's something wrong with you.

You feel that way because you are not around guns in real life but you do see them in movies television and in games, where they are not used as they are generally used but instead used to drive the plot of the drama by being used for violence. Anytime a gun is shown on a dramatic TV show or movie it will be used, usually inappropriately, by the end of the show. That's how you condition a fear response.

So are you saying it's inappropriate to portray guns a killing machines? Tell me, how does one use a gun without being violent? Also, how am I not around guns IRL when there are three in my house?

I would probably say "foolish" instead of "inappropriate". So you have three guns, and guns can only be used for violence, tell me about the violence you have committed with them. How many people have you killed, with three guns it ought to be at least 3 right?

Of the 3, two are from my late grandfather which haven't been used by me, and were used for target practice by the retired marine and my father. The other is my supersonic air-soft rifle, which I have blasted poor apples and containers to bits with. No violence occurred through these weapons as no animals were killed and nobody was threatened by them. However, my justification for their presence is that they are single-shot, so I can protect myself yet I couldn't easily shoot many people with it.

as long as you only have to protect yourself from one person and you take them down with one air gun round right?
So you are just like everyone else who owns guns who doesn't do anything bad? why not just restrict those who do the wrong things?

The "You are wrong..." comment was directed towards the maker of the video. The other is at @superdavey

In order for a fear to be irrational, it either has to be unfounded, or based on something false. The fear of guns is based on the fact that guns are machines designed for the soul purpose of killing. Is it irrational to fear death? You may say guns are for protection, but how does it assure that goal? I wonder, do you think it is irrational to fear Islam? You have an irrational fear of not being armed my friend.

You are trying to fabricate a rational excuse for what is an emotional response. A gun doesn't kill someone by itself. It can be used by another PERSON to kill someone. The same is true of cars, knives, chainsaws, and a few dozen other things which are in your house right now. Fearing death is rational. Fearing a THING that won't kill you on its own, when there's no one around who wants to use it to kill you, is an emotional response.

Well, considering that I live with 3 guns, I think we can rule out the idea that I'm any more afraid of guns than you are. My point is, it isn't possible to make necessary use a gun without killing, injuring, or threatening someone, unlike all the other things you mentioned. This is not an emotional response, it's a logical refutation of your comparison. There are things you can defend yourself with that don't kill. By blaming only the person with intent while ignoring the device that magnified their potential to carry out that specific intent, which is the purpose of the device, is intellectually dishonest. I'm afraid of people with guns, because people are unpredictable and guns are an amplifier.

"guns are machines designed for the soul purpose of killing. "

False, the average handgun in America will be used in a homicide about once every 10,000 years. Guns are designed with the sole purpose of protecting, feeding or entertaining the user safely, except that is more than one. Saying guns are designed for a sole purpose is foolish since they are designed for many different applications.

How a gun ensures protection, at least with the threat of severe injury, at most with death. If when you accidentally use something and someone in it's way is killed or injured, I wouldn't call it safe. For necessity, a gun is designed for one purpose in mind, to kill for whatever reason, any other use is like juggling knifes and should be restricted to a shooting range. Finally, let me debunk that statistic 3 times. If that's true, it's only because there are so many guns in America. I wasn't taking about homicide, I said killing, meaning one's self or another, intentionally or accidentally. Lastly, 10,000 years, so I guess this doesn't apply to America or guns considering neither have existed for even a quarter of that time.

Statistically, because of course guns have not been around for 10,000 years, the average gun in America will be used in a homicide once every 10,000 years. Thus to claim that their primary use is homicide is clearly false. Thus you need to come up with a better answer. In fact they are not designed to kill but to protect, those that are not designed for hunting or target shooting, and that is what they are used for as many as 3 million times a year.
Accidental gun fatalities are at an all time low, despite gun numbers being at an all time high and a much larger population and much more liberal gun laws.
Why do you care what method people use to commit suicide?
Gun suicides have trended down over time as well.

Yes indeed, for the longest time guns were only used as plot devices in dramatic productions. But now we live in an age of reality TV and so we get to see guns as they are actually used in America, almost never for gun violence. Unless you consider shooting an alligator gun violence. They have lost the culture war and they don't know it.