This is more complicated than one response will suffice.
Based on constitutional design, and liberties of the people within the lands that are governed by it, it presents an opposing argument that people have the natural right to defend themselves.
If there was an all out ban on projectile weaponry within one nation, this would create a security issue unless there was a unanimous treaty with every nation, to do so as well.
This is one of the major reasons other countries consider the need for nuclear ballistic programs, to counter any attempted aggression by foreign elements to remove the sovereignty of said countries.
The issue is not the weapon itself, but the premise into which the weapon is perceived to be created for.
When someone uses them as an offensive tool, it goes against the nature implied within constitutional ordinances (aside for war treaties).
Before we start to look at stats that compare and contrast "pro-gun" states and gun violence beside "anti-gun" states and gun violence, the one thing we cannot look past is the term "society".
See EU Army (would go into this further here, but would override the thread).
The idea that civilians would have highly limited or completely restricted access to defensive arms, while the military allegiance can (shooting unarmed civilians), imposes a conflict with the safeguard again any type of slow tyrannical buildup.
I really don't get into this discussion much, because the creation of the projectile weapon was for the use against a larger predator or enemy.
I've always seen anyone that uses a projectile weapon in an offensive and aggressive manor as a weak coward... like throwing a shoe at a spider, instead of stepping on it.
So what goes on with so called "black on black" gun violence, has to do more with cowards and fearful young people, than it has to do with guns or gun control.
See Zulu Conquest
A true warrior isn't violent (emotional) because of what someone says to them (put some respek on my name), they are violent because they are trying to survive an offensive onslaught by an enemy.
Can you imagine going to war because someone said "your shoes are dirty"?
"Black on Black" conflicts are mental illness wars that are funded by (gun trade markets) the same ones trying to push for "gun control".
The "War on Drugs" was manufactured by some in the same factions of those that were helping to bring the narcotics in from Columbia and Afghanistan.
Profiting from both the "illness/chaos" and the "cure/calm".
View attachment 5892
When some say "the system is rigged", it's talking about the system of geopolitics.
The strategy is deep and wide, and as stated at the beginning, it cannot be expressed fully in one post, and probably not in one thread.
Respect