Even though this is a hot-button topic, civil and sensible discussion should still be able to occur without resorting to the ridiculous small-minded personal attacks and the "you versus us" stupidity when faced with a differing point of view. If you're offended by the discussion, just stay the hell out of it - free country, right?
Just for some background - I live in a country where it's quite difficult to to get a firearm license. Guns are not banned, but citizens need to demonstrate a need for protection over and above simply wanting one for self defence. Two types of permits are available: first is an estate license which allows land/estate owners and farmers, etc. to own non-concealable rifles and shotguns to be used on the property. The second is a concealed carry permit that allows mainly business owners, security workers and others who make a case for being at higher than average risk of robbery or attack to own and carry (always concealed) a handgun. Applications must be accompanied by medical (mainly eyesight and history of mental illness) certification, two character witnesses and two family endorsements. The police processes them for background checks and then you are interviewed before a final decision is made. Once you obtain approval, you must take and pass certification training and testing.
I am a strong believer in every person having the right and the ability to defend themselves, their families and their properties. I own guns, grew up with guns in the household and I was was taught to use them properly from an early age.
I do not believe that every person should be automatically entitled to own a gun, though, simply because not every person is automatically capable and inclined to use one responsibly and safely. The same applies to automobile licenses - get the necessary training and pass the test, and you're good to go.
To me, turning any old person loose with any number of firearms they want buy is like allowing anybody the right to jump into a car and hit the streets without testing and licensing; some people will manage ok, but others will cause unnecessary carnage. Freedom is one thing but as a society grows and changes it must have order and a set of laws based on evolving wisdom and logic.
I personally like guns (along with cars, boats, etc.), and I generally subscribe to and live by (non-denominational) christian-based western values, but I also believe in sensible laws and controls. I speak for myself and I'm totally open minded to other points of view, even to changing my position in the face of incontrovertible argument. I fail to see the real world sense in holding infallibly sacred and clinging to every letter and detail of a constitutional document that was written by men a long time ago based upon a very different set of influences, values and social realities. Keep the intent, philosophy and spirit - yes - but giving it and those who penned it some sort of holy, regardless untouchability and everlasting relevance for all eternity to me is difficult to comprehend.
Edit to add: I agree that laws are only followed by the law-abiding, and criminals will do what they want regardless, but there must be a sensible set of laws and appropriate penalties for breaking them. Saying there should be no gun control laws because criminals won't obey them anyway is like saying no point in having drunk driving laws because drunks will drive drunk anyway.