@Sherban: "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Your entire post is kneejerk reactionary nonsense that doesn't actually reflect the way things work. In fact what you say is downright scary, and giving up your rights simply to feel safer is a really insane stance to take. How would you explain, for instance, the UK having the highest violent crime rate in all of Europe higher than even the US? Not just gun crime mind you, but all violent crime. Its currently increasing very rapidly as well. In the years following their gun ban they had a very statistically significant INCREASE in gun crime, one that if the pattern followed in the US would mean a ridiculous number more deaths a year after a similar ban.
How do you explain the highest murder rates per capita in places around the US with increasingly draconian gun laws, Chicago for instance? there's far more culturally here going on than just a ban all the guns could fix, and assault weapons (PS pop quiz, what IS an assault weapon under US law, I bet you wont even be able to answer that) cause FAR less deaths every year than hand guns. Deaths from all rifles, which encompasses assault weapons, are very low compared to handguns.
What "essential liberty" are you talking about here? Is owning any weapon an essential liberty? So why aren't you mad you can't own a rocket launcher? Or a tank?
I'm not sure where you get your UK statistics. Here's a Guardian article detailing the most recent crime data for England and Wales, with all numbers trending down for the last ten years.
Maybe you're right: maybe we should look at many types of weapons, including handguns, and make them harder to purchase. But you cannot possibly look at gun laws in the US and not correlate them to gun crimes in the US when comparing the same numbers throughout developed countries.