During the Cold War it was evident that the nuclear arms race was threatening the world so to reduce the likely hood of nuclear war we signed treaties limiting the building, testing, and use of nuclear weapons. Why has the concept that when you limit the use and distribution of dangerous things, it greatly reduced the odds that people will die as a result of their use?
I think we should treat it as a domestic arms race. Ban, for the civilian market, the purchase and distribution of assault weapons, high capacity mags, ban the use of anything other than standard ammunition (nobody needs armor piercing or hollow point to hunt), and lastly, limit the number and type of guns a human being can purchase. No household in America needs a damn arsenal to hunt or defend itself. I have two guns, a 22-pistol and a 40 yr old single shot shotgun that my grandfather gave me. Neither have been fired by me but I have them. My dad as guns, he was once a gun nut and has assault rifles. They stay in his case and he refuses to sell them to put them on the market. Nobody needs these weapons. Pass a law that says a civilian cannot buy 4 pistols in a year or go to the store and over six months buy 2 shotguns and 3 glocks. I don't buy five gallons of milk in a month.
And don't bitch about your second amendment rights. The founding fathers never wrote that amendment (the most horrible written part of the Constitution in my opinion) to give civilians the right to stay better armed than the authorities. Many households around me have more guns than the police in the city, which, in itself is ridiculous. This is a domestic arms race and it should be treated with the same urgency.