This subject has interested me for quite a while now, and as it has received a lot of media attention lately, I thought I'd like to say something about it.
As you may or may not have noticed so far, I am a person who hates blind idealism.
I believe any solutions brought about by such a mindset may not even work in the short term, and they basically screw everyone over in the long term.
I am also a large proponent to the concept of armed peace.
I believe it would be a good deterrent to violent crime, in the first place as a scare tactic, removing the apparent feeling of overwhelming power experienced by the perpetrator, and second, a measure of damage control, allowing the perpetrator to be eliminated sooner, limiting the loss of human life, should an armed conflict arise.
First of all, there are rogue elements in society that wish to harm others, this is a fact and no amount of sticking your heads in sand will make that problem go away.
All mass shootings are horrible tragedies, no one can deny that, and anyone who thinks about minimizing said horror deserves a punch to the face.
The current commotion in the United States, bent on banning assault rifles, however, is not the answer.
First of all, history itself, and pretty much every single facet about our society clearly points out one simple fact: any attempt to ban a product will FAIL, and even boost its sales.
If you make a product illegal, people will want to own it, and through black market dealers, they will get it.
The battle against such a black market, which you will lose before it's even begun, will cost your country millions it does not have.
Look at the war on drugs, for instance.
You encountered a drug problem, and you had a few options before you at the time.
You could have attempted to legalize and control the product, done research to improve the product to lessen the strain on the human body...
Or explore the potential health benefits some of these "illegal drugs" may provide.
Take cannabis for instance... For years governments everywhere have been attempting to close it down, but now it turns out the substance has ample health benefits.
For instance: Authism and fragile x syndrome
But, I'm steering off course here. My major point I'm trying to make is that billions of dollars are being spent every year in a failing attempt to put a halt to what could have been a major industry, while your nation has over 11 trillion dollars in debt.
Let's just say that the drug traffickers and dealers weren't getting any poorer.
To summarize, short sighted and idealistic linear thinkers as you were, you thought you could just put a stop to the problem by attempting to ban the product; you failed, lost a lot of money, made the wrong people very rich and the problem still persists.
So, if we take what you apparently have not learned from the war on drugs and extrapolate this to the gun matter, the results would not be pretty.
Here's a simplified flowchart of how I think it would play out:
A major tragedy has already occurred in my country, involving the use of illegally acquired weapons.
Apologies for the wikipedia reference, but for now it's sufficient
This is a slight indication that an attempt to ban weapons amounts to nothing more than grasping at straws and would be just another waste of time, money and human lives.
You're not solving the problem, you're just giving up control over the situation.
Personally, I'd prefer better psychological profiling as a prerequisite to attaining a gun license, but that's just me.
Also, while researching the matter I found the following debating fails:
Crazed hippies interrupt NRA speach
Paranoid gun nut Alex jones
And I find that Piers Morgans whole rhetoric in general falls under failure regarding the whole gun control topic.
Also, here's another interesting little link:
debunking nine myths of the gun control debate