I mean, complete lock down on weapons for the public is ideal, but I suppose that realistically, America is a bad place that needs these stupid bits of metal. So civilians will ask for guns. I'm not saying this is good- a sane person can easily go mad- but at least it stops some of the people who would certainly do wrong with the guns. Giving a gun to a maniac is quite simply a bad idea. It doesn't help MUCH but it helps.
Fact is if no one had guns than you wouldn't have the safety issues with guns and criminals, worked in Canada. At least if you had to have a background check than a criminal couldn't just go to walmart and pick one up. Better Idea is if you catch someone that has a gun than insure they have a licence for that gun.
The shooter in the Charleston shooting was NOT eligible to get a gun, had a background check, and still got a gun. It doesn't work. Also there are many illegal guns such as illegally fully auto guns that are illegally sold which background checks sure don't stop. Laws define crime, not stop it.
Do you think criminals would bother going to a reputable dealer? I doubt it, especially if they start doing background checks. If they did go to a reputable dealer, odds are they would just give a phony i.D. With the name of someone with a clean record. Not that they would need to as it would not be that difficult to smuggle them. Another option they would have is to steal the guns. No background check required. This would make legal gun owner more likely to be robbed.
Another factor is that they are criminals. Odds are, any crime that would prevent them from getting a firearm would make them less likely to obey the law, especially those about weapons.
Sure, this means that they are illegally possessing a firearm. Thing is, if they have been found guilty of a violet crime in the past and obtain a gun, it is probable that they are going to do worse than just illegal possession. Next to the crime they commit, illegal possession of a firearm would be like being sited for having broken tail light after you have already been charged with hit and run.
Another factor would be that the only people who would register their guns are law abiding citizens who would have no intent of committing a crime.
One of the instances that have caused so much uproar about gun control is the Sandy Hook shooting. In this case, no amount of screening would have made any difference as the only involvement the gun owner had was being the first victim. Where any of the guns owned by the shooter? Nope.
It's not always the case that a mental unstable or gangster would commit crime.Sometimes normal stable people could become a criminal sooner or later at any time.Yes psychopath and gangsters are criminal,but i just say that normal stable people could also belong one of them.I think it's not necessary to have guns.