A question about guns

Lawn darts are illegal in America 'because they can hurt children.' But guns are okay. That sounds absurd, doesn't it? And it is: http://www.armedwithreason.com/debunking-the-guns-dont-kill-people-people-kill-people-myth/

(Click to enlarge)

'If people can't get their hands on guns, they will just kill with knives.' I have searched but have been unable to find an actual scientific report backing up this claim by the NRA. I have however found statistics that proof without a doubt that it's much easier to survive a knife attack than an attack with a gun. On the same day as the Sandy Hook school shooting, a man in China stabbed 23 children and an elderly woman at a primary school.
Nobody died. Just saying. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chenpeng_Village_Primary_School_stabbing

'But if guns are no longer easy to get, criminals will just get them on the black market!' One: before stuff appears on the black market, it has to cross the regular market first so if it's never on the regular market (because it's not produced for instance) it can't be bought on the black market. Yes, it's that simple. But why would a criminal buy a gun on the black market if he can just get a rifle for free with simply opening a bank account? http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?t=713904

When the NRA has its way, every single person (including teenagers!) will be carrying loaded guns 'to protect themselves and others from people with guns because the only guy to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun!' So, let's start with handing a gun to every single passenger on every single airplane!

What do you think: will there be less hijacking and terrorism in the sky if everyone out there has a gun?

Tens of thousands of Americans (not exaggerated!) die every year from (mostly gun related and a lot of suicides) gun violence. More toddlers than terrorists shoot down people, yet the US government spends a trillion (that's a huge amount of money) on fighting terrorism and zilch on telling parents not to leave a loaded gun lying around. http://wncn.com/2015/11/23/police-5-year-old-boy-shot-killed-by-older-sibling-while-playing-with-cat/

Luckily some people seem to be coming to their senses: California has just passed some laws that recquire background checks for anyone who wants to buy a gun: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/01/california-governor-jerry-brown-gun-control-pass-veto

But seriously: responsible gun owners keep their gun - unloaded! - in a safe. Right? So how do they use it to protect themselves and their family against murderous burglars?

A pro gun man responded and declared

a gun is not useful against terrorist attacks

and useless against people who want to rob 

or kill you. He just likes having a gun for

the sole reason of having a gun. 

Apparently.

When a burglar enters his home,

he will fumble for the key, the locked drawer,

his gun and the safety.

In the dark.

While the burglar patiently waits to get shot.

Apparently.

Okay, so maybe gun ownership should be restricted to anyone who has never undertaken a criminal activity. In other words: only law abiding citizens should (perhaps) be allowed to own a gun. So no gun for anyone who has ever had to much to drink but still drove a car, anyone who has ever stolen something, anyone who has ever hit someone or any men who ever went out with a married woman who was not his wife. Like Frank Sinatra. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/mugshots/celebrity/music/frank-sinatra Gun ownership should also be restricted to people who ever thought of criminal acts like stated above. After all: everyone who ever thought of blowing up a building or killing people is a terrorist so everyone who ever thought of kissing the neighbour's partner, stealing the boss's car or speak evil of God should get the same treatment.

With using valid arguments: what are your thoughts about gun ownership? Who should be allowed to carry, who shouldn't and why?