If you are unable to describe your position (I've asked 3 times politely for this) then please kindly exit the thread. Describe what guns are removed, and how the government removes them. Be specific on the program so that we can debate the reality of what you are proposing. I am beginning to believe you do not have any solution other than to say "look what they did in Aus". Australia and the United States are two very different situations.
Which guns? Bought back for how much? What is the time period in which this occurs? How do you get around the constitution, etc?
It's not a question of whether I agree with you on if they should go - it's a question of realism. First, I agree that a bump stock is nothing more than a way around the restriction of automatic firing, and therefore should be restricted in the same manner automatic weapons are. However, you're talking about a piece of easily manufactured plastic composite that can now be 3D printed. The people that use them do so for the kick of being able to fire automatic, but almost anyone who really is into shooting would never use one for the accuracy loss. So put the restriction in place (i'm fine with this), but you'll never get rid of them. And if some crazy son-of-a-bitch wants to use one in an attempt to mass murder civilians, the fact that you made them illegal won't stop him from doing so or acquiring one of the hundreds of thousands already out there, or printing his own, and doing his nasty deed.
Restrictions on new guns would reduce lethal capability among new gun owners.... Which seem to be a significant portion of the mass shooters. It does nothing about existing guns you say, but most gun owners are law abiding citizens so the older lethal weapons would not be an issue unless obtained in the black market. This doesn't solve the issue of shooters stealing their mom's guns or older shooters.... But what happens 30, 40 years from now?
The problem is not the sheer amount of guns available. The problem is the sheer amount of people with poor conflict resolutions skills, inability to delay gratification and no real purpose in life. But one example- https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2008/07/black-black-nihilism/ I could have 20 guns at my disposal and would never fire one except to exercise the gun.
The banned ones. For some amount of money. Some months. It doesn't disallow gun ownership so not a problem for the 2nd.
Their mom (Newtown), online (aurora), some other gun that was obtained legally by someone at some point. US weapons manufacturer are not selling in the black market. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...have-been-saying-for-a-long-time-about-crime/ "All guns start out as legal guns," Fabio said in an interview. But a "huge number of them" move into illegal hands. "As a public-health person, I'd like to be able to figure out that path," he added.
There are millions of illegal firearms on the street. If you actually went looking, you'd be stunned at how easy it is to get an illegal, untraceable firearm. Regardless, I don't have a problem with full background checks at all. Restrictions on new guns, depending on what they were, could be something I would support. What do you mean by that?