I have no radical stance about weapons. I simply do not know what should be done or allowed. I am learning to shoot with a gun, I will buy a gun, later maybe even the assault rifle, however I think that having a gun is in most cases more dangerous than not having it.
Unlike most of people here I was assaulted few times with knives and once I was at a gas station that was at gas station when bunch of black guys from favela assaulted it with guns. In none of those situations the gun would make better outcome. No one died or was killed. So this is an argument against guns.
However: I have experience from 2 Latin American countries where one has almost UK policy against guns and second has liberal US policy, where you can simply buy guns in supermarket without permission. The country, where the guns are prohibited is far more dangerous and there is safe place for anybody. The second country is much more safe (although nothing in UK or Euro standard), because many people really carry their guns and other people are scared to attack. There might be and for sure also other factors, like the more dangerous country is under the the cultural influence of wilder black culture.
So I do not know what should be done. I just do not trust radical cowboys or pacifists. Also people who are seeking government permission for protection against government are missing the point. State will not help to protect people against itself. And in 21st century a war against state is not being held through weapons unless you have an U-bomb. If anyone wants a protection against state, he/she should start with cryptography, managing/hiding his online identity and so on.
If you talk to God, you are praying; If God talks to you, you have schizophrenia.