I don't mean to repeat myself, but since it was the other thread I said it, I'll say it here... My opinion : keep the 2nd amendment (in the US) rights but put tougher restrictions on getting guns (legally) if one has a record of certain crimes. Not just gun crimes, but any history that shows a prone to violence or harrassment cases where possessing a gun could indicate a temptation to use it.
It wouldn't solve the problem of someone getting it underground, but it would reduce more instances of gun crimes. If one doesn't already have one in the gun cabinet, then they wouldn't have the temptation to use it in a moment of fury, for those prone to going to extreme levels.
So for regular "hunting and self defense", sure.
But I do have to wonder about some instances of the self-defense part. A person must really live in a bad neighborhood or in dangerous situations on a regular basis to honestly feel the need to have one for "self defense", imo. Otherwise, I think most cases of "I carry mah six-shooter in mah piggup truck for mah right to protect mah-self" is more of a case of having one just to look tough than it is for "protection". (That was my impersonation of a certain cousin who I've had this debate with before
