[G. Adams]

If we, in Britain, hadn't banned guns from poor people in the early 1800's, we would have had our revolution already.

But there are some none revolutionary reasons.

If you ban guns, then all the law abiders hand them in. Criminals don't. So we have an armed criminal population, and a disarmed and vulnerable innocent population.

Also, if your a libertarian as most of us are, you support freedom in all areas that arn't infringing other peoples rights, like drug use. Now you might argue that gun crimes most certainly do affect more than their user. However, if people are so enraged they are going to kill someone, or are part of a gang that wants weapons for protection, it doesn't matter if they take the guns off them. In GB, we have a ban on all handguns, and its very hard to get a rifle or shotgun license. So we have a low gun crime rate. BUT, instead we do have a high knife attack, and even more increasingly sword attacks. The point I am making is that banning guns won't save lives.

And importantly, I have a human right to protect myself. If someone attacks me am I expected just to take a beating/stabbing/bullet, hope I live and then call the police? No, I have the right to defend myself. And although my martial arts might help me stop beating, even knifings, it won't stop a bullet. Thus, the government has no right to stop me from owning a firearm, unless they each and every person their own armed policeman.