Many on the Left can't turn down the opportunity to preach gun control in the context of John's murder. The arguments are typically made in good faith, but I find them tiresome. Two examples follow.
1) David Corn of Mother Jones: "John Lennon's Murder 30 Years Later: A Remembrance"
It is now 25 years later. John Lennon is still dead. (And so is George Harrison.) The NRA years ago moved to a bigger and better headquarters in suburban Virginia. The gun lobby has had its ups and downs, but it's been mostly ups of late (such as the expiration of the ban on assault weapons). Lennon's death, it turns out, was no catalyst for action. And we have still—after all this time—not learned how to stem the tide of gun violence. Which is one of several reasons why this anniversary of Lennon's death is a sad day.
2) Tony Norman of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: "Lennon's legacy lost among gun passions"
It is hard to exaggerate the amount of visceral disgust at guns that John Lennon's murder generated in those days before the NRA had an unbreakable chokehold on the U.S. Congress. It was a sentiment that would resurface the following spring after the attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan.
Looking back on Lennon's murder 30 years later, it is interesting to note how the gun angle has nearly completely receded in mainstream remembrances and news coverage.