"Should" be has nothing to do with it. "Can" be is the question, and the answer is no - you can't ban them. It's too complex and your ban would be ineffective in reducing crime.
Looks like he chickened out... Not that that is a surprise, but, it's OK... I had to give him a chance, for the sake of argument and civility. American gun owners should be glad, I guess... Because if this is the type of people that want a ban on the weapons law abiding citizens usually want to acquire, there should be no great reason to fear, since they cannot simply defend their position and when they run out of arguments, they start to scream and shout like children and/or simply run away... Which just makes the case of gun owners stronger and the other side weaker... If a ban is to be put in place or even the Second Ammendment repealed, they will have to convince gun owners with sound and reasonable arguments... But since "whacko, nutjob, gun nut, "fucking stupid" and other terms is all they can come up with... Gun owners can be a little more secure that they're right will be maintained.
So you don't care about the NEW nut job (usually not a criminal) on a whim going to the local store, getting a NEW AR15 and killing kids in school. Noted. No it is NOT about removing them from the fucking criminals that currently have them. Forget that, for a moment. It's about helping to prevent nutjobs from doing mass shootings. Why you cannot understand is a mystery It's like you have blinders on.
I weigh the benefit you propose in getting law abiding citizens to turn in their guns while at the same time having criminals keep theirs with the potential tragedies that can be addressed through better law enforcement, etc. That's correct. And when I do this analysis, I see the flaw in your "plan" to universally ban weapons from those who don't commit crimes. It's absolutely about removing them from the fucking criminals that currently have them. Why you cannot understand this is a mystery. You want me to surrender my right to defend myself without telling me I will be safer because of it. What kind of fucked up deal is that to agree to? No way, dude. Never happen until you can first get the bad guys disarmed.
Note the outrage from Futurecurrents about the number of kids killed and wounded in just this past weekend in Chicago. Remember: It's all about the children!! http://abc7chicago.com/6-killed-32-wounded-in-chicago-weekend-violence/3501600/ 6 killed, 32 wounded in Chicago weekend violence By Diane Pathieu Monday, May 21, 2018 11:56AM CHICAGO (WLS) -- It's been another violent weekend in Chicago, with at least 6 people killed and 32 others hurt in shootings across the city. The most recent shooting happened Sunday night in the South Shore neighborhood. At around 11:15 p.m. a 21-year-old man was standing outside in the 7800-block of South Yates Boulevard when someone opened fire. The man was hit twice, in the leg and stomach and is in critical condition. Police said he is a gang member. Also Sunday night, a man was shot while inside a van in the 3200-block of North Pulaski Road. Another car pulled up to the 18-year-old while he was in the passenger seat and opened fire, hitting the man in the arm. He is in good condition and police said that shooting is also gang related. Sunday's sole fatality was a 16-year-old boy shot to death in the Lawndale neighborhood on the Southwest Side. About noon, the 16-year-old boy was approached by someone in the 1800-block of South Komensky who fired shots and struck him in the face, police said. The boy was taken to Mounty Sinai Hospital, where he died. The Cook County Medical Examiner's Office didn't immediately provide details about the death. Area Central detectives were conducting a homicide investigation. And on Saturday night a 13-year-old boy was walking in the 800-block of North Latrobe Avenue when two people came out of a gangway and fired shots, shooting the teenager in the shoulder. He was taken to the hospital and his condition has stabilized. Police say they are investigating the weekend shootings. The violent weekend comes as Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson welcomed the addition of 100 new recruits to the police department. The new recruits are part of a plan to grow CPD by 1,000 officers. The mayor and superintendent addressed the recruits Monday morning we all face. "I'd like to see a perfect world, zero shootings and zero murders. But, we want to get it down to, I won't say acceptable, but better than it is now," Johnson said. "Not only are we adding 100 new recruits, 110 detectives and at the end of the week, 130 are graduating and they'll be hitting the streets immediately. I think it's a mistake just to think about the police officers. I'm proud that we're adding 1,000 new officers on top of the 12,500. But I'm also equally proud of the record 32,000 kids in summer jobs this summer," Emanuel said.
So you don't care about the NEW nut job (usually not a criminal) on a whim going to the local store, getting a NEW AR15 and killing kids in school. Noted. Turn in what guns? I want you to surrender your right to defend yourself? You can't do that with a shotgun? Or five shotguns? WTH is wrong with you that you think you need handguns and AR15s to defend yourself? Maybe you need medication to reduce your anxiety.
This is a very valid point, but to me at least, it is not the most compelling argument for allowing civilian access to weapons like an AR 15. The introductory phrase of the Second Amendment speaks of "the security of a free State". To me, that means the Drafters wanted an armed citizenry to safeguard freedom. The "militia" they spoke of was understood at the time to constitute the able-bodied men of a community. It would be a bizarre interpretation of the Second Amendment to conclude it means the government can bar access to the weapons best suited to fulfill its purpose. Rationally interpreted, the clear intent of the Amendment would allow civilian access to standard military arms, not just their civilianized semi-auto versions.
Just another example of the usual M.O. of people who have idiotic positions when questioned about them: Avoid answering the questions at all costs and try to change the subject.