Banning handguns not the solution

The 800-death statistic is very misleading. It includes all suicides (60 percent of 800), justifiable homicides and crimes committed by gangs and juveniles. Your use of this statistic leads the uninformed reader to believe that the tragedy in Michigan is a common occurrence. 

The number of school shootings has been decreasing for years while the media's reporting has been increasing exponentially. In the future don't jump to the anti-gun Web sites to find your facts.  

Your solution for banning handguns is laughable. You have ignored the study by Gary Kleck, a Florida State University criminologist, which found American civilians use a firearm more than 2 million times a year to defend themselves and their families. The vast majority of those firearms were handguns. You also ignored the fact that a handgun is the most affordable and easiest firearm to become proficient with.  

If handguns were to be banned, what's to stop people from using long guns to kill? Nothing, so I guess we'd have to ban those too.

Assuming we did ban all guns, where would they go? 

As they did in Australia and Great Britain, we would find that they would fall into the hands of criminals. Crime rates in these countries  have jumped greatly since their sheepish politicians have banned virtually all civilian ownership of firearms. The unarmed make much better victims.

Before 1968 most kids could walk into any general store and purchase any type of gun they could afford. How, with the most restrictive gun laws, does something like this happen? Why didn't we see more of this when children had easier access to firearms? 

You could take the easy road out and blame the inanimate object used or you could look at other factors. Maybe the lack of discipline in the home and school, the violence-drenched media or the lack of morality in our society has just a little bit to do with it. Nah, let's blame the guns!