1. Gun powder was invented in the 9th century and can be made at home
2. The first gun was invented in the 13th century and have been made at home.
3. You can train a dog to sniff for drugs, but you can't train a dog to sniff for metal parts.
4. Anyone with a CNC machine can cut out the parts of a modern semi-automatic pistol using blueprints downloaded from the internet. Anyone with a milling machine and a lathe could effectively do the same.
5. 3D printers, bought for a little over $1,000, can cut out plastic gun parts. http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/technology/d-printer-plans-for-a-pistol-assault-rifle-parts-posted-online/story-fn7cejkh-1226437308101
6. The UK banned handguns in 1997. Read this article to see how well that went... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2165531/Its-wild-wild-West-Midlands-Homemade-gun-Uzis-Ak47s-make-huge-haul-firearms-seized-police-just-year.html#ixzz1z4KX1oLW
7. There are 2.75 million firearms legally registered in Australia to 730,000 Australians. That's one firearm for every eight people. It's well known that at the last gun buy-back, many firearms were not surrendered to police and still remain in circulation.
8. Pistols up to 120 years old have been used in gun crime.
So lets say we ban guns. Do criminals obey the law? Prohibition didn't work. Drug crime still exists. How is this achievable and what purpose would it serve? How many people die on our roads every year? Wouldn't our tax dollars be better spent fixing our roads and investing in driver education?
Don't take my word for it, read this research paper from Harvard, or at least the conclusion....
"This Article has reviewed a significant amount of evidence from a wide variety of international sources. Each individual portion of evidence is subject to cavil—at the very least the general objection that the persuasiveness of social scientific evidence cannot remotely approach the persuasiveness of conclusions in the physical sciences. Nevertheless, the burden of proof rests on the proponents of the 'more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death' mantra, especially since they argue public policy ought to be based on that mantra.
To bear that burden would at the very least require showing that a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that have imposed stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared across the world."