Australians don't have a Constitutional RIGHT to own firearms, you utter moron. Not happening. Give leftists an inch and they'll take a mile.
Be a little clearer in your argument and stop trying to be so slippery and maybe the dialogue will be more fruitful. If you are asking me whether the solution to kids shooting up schools is "making more guns", then of course it isn't. But neither is it "making less guns". The number of guns being manufactured at this point is completely irrelevant to the conversation. This is because the number of firearms in circulation is so massive, that simply stopping it now accomplishes nothing other than to prevent citizens that want to legally own - and have a constitutional right to own - a firearm with no intent to commit any crime at all. This represents - by such a large amount - the majority of those wanting to buy a gun. If you're in to analogies as you seem, this would be like restricting the purchasing of cars because a few nuts use a car to run folks over.
This reminds me of how you would use the exact same argument on climate change, inclusive of the chart, no matter how many times people would show it to be utter horseshit. Just say it over and over as many times as possible in an attempt to brute force parrot the point and have people acquiesce out of sheer boredom. I remember the mods even warned you about it. Australia, for the thousandth time, is nothing like the current situation. You cannot apply the same methodology in the United States because of the sheer number of illegally owned weapons already in circulation - something Australia did not have to deal with. So stop making shit up already. I've asked you how this would be done, and you are unable to provide specifics. You just say "ban guns" and think that is an example of specificity. If you make hand guns and "assault rifles" (glad you are putting that in quotes now, it shows that you actually can be taught eventually) do you honestly think that people who already possess them illegally are going to suddenly turn them in? You say "if you get caught you go to jail". The people who already own them will go to jail when caught, why should they care if you apply this law to everyone who owns one of these weapons? If the bad guys are looking to kill people, and murder is a much more serious offense (or if they are planning to kill themselves in the process) why would your law scare them away? The only thing it's going to do is stop law abiding citizens who don't do anything bad in the first place. There have been court rulings that over ruled handgun bans and quoted the constitution as the support. So regardless of whether you, GWB and Freddie consider it constitutional, they didn't.
Like I said, what Australia did, or something like it. and no, none of the charts I ever posted are horseshit. They were correct, you mistaken mental midget.
Yes, gun nuts think that if we have speed limits, that eventually we won't be able to drive at all. Because they are stupid frightened little boy-men
I could not have been more clear and less slippery. Try it sometime. I specifically addressed your argument about prevalence and made no mention of the Second Amendment. That is your fallback position whenever you find yourself up against a wall trying to debate the gun problem: Yeah, really.