I seriously doubt that the majority of illegal guns start as legal guns in the USA. Sorry but we're not the only country that manufactues them.
Would you like the statistics? They come from the ATF and the FBI.
http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/downloads/pdf/trace_report_final.pdf
It is a partisan report, but the numbers are very, very real.
Yes, the USA is not the only country that makes guns, but it is by far the largest small arms manufacturer in the world. Most major international gun manufacturers (Glock, H&K, Browning) make their US guns in the USA. Glock manufactures all their North American weapons in Georgia, for example. So you can seriously doubt things all you want, but numbers don't lie.
My point is that if you ban people from having guns, the only people you will be banning are the responsible people. Criminals will pay no heed to the ban.
Clean the shit out of your ears. I've never said that people should be banned from having guns. I've said that certain classes of firearms are unnecessary for civilian ownership. I don't want to take guns away from people who are responsible. I think that concealed carry permits cause more problems than they solve, but that's also a different argument. I just think that the sale of automatic weapons and assault rifles should be banned, 100%. People don't need them.
People who look at reasonable requests for gun restrictions and hear "OMG THEY WANT MY GUNS" are part of the fucking problem. Nobody wants to take guns away. That's stupid and unconstitutional. They want to put legitimate safety restrictions on US gun culture.
And no everyone doesn't need a gun, however as much as you may disagree, it is my right as a U.S. citizen to own a firearm.
Nobody has suggested it isn't. The Supreme Court has agreed. What they haven't agreed is that the Second Amendment constitutes a right to own whatsoever weapon you see fit. It is, like all other rights, regulated carefully by restrictions on what you can and cannot do. They have also ruled that assault rifle bans are 100% constitutional. The right to bear arms is not an unlimited right. It means you have the right to own certain classes of weapons in a manner the government chooses to regulate. My personal opinion is meaningless here. The SCOTUS has already decided this.
Remember when Hitler, Stalin, or any other despot takes power one of the first things they do is to take the weapons away from the citizens.
This is a complete fabrication. Hitler came into power in 1933, but did not alter Germany's gun control laws until 1938. The 1938 Weapons Act made it easier for Germans to own guns, but stripped Jews of the rights to own guns. However, this did not mean the Jews couldn't defend themselves - ghettoization was already going on, and the Jews had lost so many rights that they couldn't really do anything. Besides, a pistol wouldn't have stopped the SS. It wouldn't even had made them blink. When the Jews did shoot back (and sometimes they did) it just meant they died earlier.
Again, Stalin came into power in 1925; Lenin in 1917. Guns weren't restricted in the USSR until 1929. Records are very scattered, but most Russians outside of the cities owned a gun - usually a hunting rifle. Again, gun control wasn't really the problem here. Stalin established himself through the party apparatus, and fighting off the Soviet government was simply impossible. You can't stop that sort of power when you're just a village in the middle of nowhere. You can win one engagement, but then the NKVD shows up and murder you all.
Red Dawn, for reference, is a fantasy, not fact.
