Uhh, let's see: First - you clearly decided not to take a second and consider what I said. Did you take an economics class in school? Do you know how supply and demand work? You don't seem like an idiot lacking knowledge of basic economic concepts, so you should be able to guess what happens in the long term if we make the illegal market the only way for these people to buy guns and then proceed to crack down on it. Exclusivity is an inflator when it comes to valuation of goods because it forces all the demand into one place, and just because this is a black market doesn't mean it isn't a market overall. If we then took steps over time to hinder or throttle that market (far more plausible than Trump's plan of throttling Mexico if we're talking candidates who would be against these kinds of gun laws), prices would go up because not only is it then the only option for many people, it's suffering from reduced supply. When a random criminal in a poor neighborhood has to work harder to afford a gun from that illegal source, the number of people who need to buy illegally who actually get a gun goes down. Second - you seem to have misinterpreted my question. I'm not asking which weapon you'd prefer to have, and I frankly don't care because the fact that we're having this discussion gives that away. I was asking which one you'd rather be threatened with as an average person who isn't wielding a gun. If you'd rather be held at gunpoint than knifepoint, you're crazy enough that I suppose background checks would indeed prevent you from buying a gun. Even assuming we allowed you to have a weapon for self-defense in the question, if you have common sense the answer should still be that you'd prefer being attacked by someone without a gun because then you can safely pull yours on them. If someone points a gun at you, you're not going to be an action hero no matter how much you want to delude yourself. You're going to sit still and do what they want because if you reach for that gun, they'll pick up on the threat as you draw it and shoot you where you stand. Just ask the guy who had his gun stolen at gunpoint a few years ago. The majority of proposed measures against gun violence are completely benign to any law-abiding citizen with the proper disposition to avoid shooting someone in a rage. There are some radical ones, yes, but you should have some faith in the shitty Congress promoted by people with views, apparently like your own from how adamant you are about this, that focus on stopping progress looking at which side it comes from rather than how good it is for the country. Those don't stand a chance of becoming law. If you feel threatened by the idea of a vendor trying to make sure you won't kill people before handing you a deadly weapon (Guns are weapons. Lethal tools designed for the sole purpose of killing. They aren't created for protection, they protect by killing. You can think what you want but if you don't understand that fact then giving you one is like handing a running chainsaw to a toddler), then you shouldn't have one in the first place for the safety of everyone around you.