It's a sweeping and incorrect generalization to say that advocates of gun legislation are anti-hunting. I am a big proponent of hunting AND in favor of reasonable legislation. There have been several news reports about the friction (before the school shooting) between some of the hunters in the Newtown and the assault weapons crowd that many people in Newtown felt were taking over the countryside.
Here in Washington State, bird hunters can't use a shotgun that holds more than 3 rounds. Why do the shooters of these assault weapons need clips that hold 30 rounds?
The NRA has really pushed the "camel's nose under the tent argument", i.e., that ANY regulation will lead to a complete ban on guns. By that reasoning, traffic laws and license requirements would lead to a ban on driving cars. Similarly, the NRA argues that, if there are guns laws, only law-abiding citizens wil obey them. There are plenty of people that drive without a license. Does that mean that driver's licenses are worthless and we should forget about them?
Neither pro-gun or anti-gun. Pro-reason, regards.