Guns like laws are made for and by people. Laws are ideally passed to improve civility, safety and thus used to benefits people. There are instances laws are passed to control and suppress one group of citizens for the benefit of others. The opinion of what constitutes civility and safety, is a matter of perspective and definition. Laws are subjectively promoted by those who offer up to the courts for consideration to sustain someone's opinion that others considers as valid. Because laws are written by people laws can be dictatorial or democratic.
What determines the difference is the intent of what is attempting to be resolved. Therefore the passage of a law can be used to suppress some citizens while giving others greater freedom of choice. Example, defending against an enemy on the open plains made gun ownership a matter of safety and survival. But in "civil" towns like Dodge City limiting firearms usage could become a matter of assuring citizens safety from danger.
American history records that from 1492 until 1968 there was very little done by local, state or federal, legislators to restrict gun ownership. In the rural communities throughout America gun ownership was and remains of a little concern. Even with the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963 and his brother Robert in 1968 there was a very little effort to control applications for possession of firearms and vitally no legislative thrust to restrict gun ownership.
Though the question of legal ownership of guns by United States citizens was assure by the Second Amendment of the Constitution local and state governments have skillfully found ways to control citizens access to various types of firearms as well as managed to find ways to control which segments of the population will have "legal" access. Many politicians have been very careful to walk the thin line of "gun registration" and "gun ownership".
After the 1968 "civil disobedient" of black bodied citizens in the streets of urban America, gun ownership has been skillfully disguised by higher prices and implementation of gun registration fees that has made "legal" ownership is very expensive. For the poor citizen ownership of a firearm can be un-affordable. Yet the poor still have the "right" to own but cannot afford to own a needed tool of defense and home protection. For example, if you purchase a car you are not restricted from owning it but you must have a license to drive, if not, driving without a license is illegal. Like automobile registration, gun registration is not only used to raise revenue but also to control a citizen's access to and ownership of firearms.
In 1968 many local and state governments passed restrictive firearms ownership laws over night. Washington DC with a population of 75% African American retained one of most restrictive laws on the books for 40 years; the laws remained enforced from 1968 until 2008. Washington DC restrictive law was justified by the local "crime" statistics, however much of the actual appeal to retention of the law can be found in understanding the majority Euro-American population fear's. As a result of these legal restrictions Virginia and Maryland citizens , predominately white population, could buy firearms practically without restriction while the black citizens of Washington DC citizens could not.
Statistics will show that much of the interest in restricting what is called "urban" gun ownership has a historical foundation. A list of laws called the "Black Codes" were passed in the 1800's by every state that allowed slavery and many that did not. These laws were designed to control the African enslaved population. It must be noted as long as African slaves were being murdered by local white citizens not one state in the union discussed or introduced laws to restrict or prevent gun ownership!
The primary justification for these "Black Codes" was the fear held by slave owners concerned with "slave revolts. If these revolts were successful not only would people died but more important to slave owners was the loss of "their property", the slave. The revolt of Nat Turner in Virginia increased "legal enforcement" such that slave owners clamped down severely on their "cargo" of human property. During this era it was illegal for African Americans to congregate on the streets, own fire works, walk at night without a white person, to own firearms and have three enslaved males together talking. It is noteworthy to understand that democratic America the "only" people to be enslaved are Africans and with the exception of the "Natives" of northern America all others are immigrants.
As were the "Black Codes" of the 1800s, today in contemporary urban American gun ownership is an emotionally charged issue. In recent times especially since 1968, the year of much civil unrest, gun ownership has taken on a different dimension entirely. Because of urban unrest and the assassination of Dr. Martin L. King the nation's attitude has been very reactive against "urban residences possession and acquisition of guns.
A book titled, "Negroes with Gun's" written by Robert A. Williams speaks to the historical reaction of whites against gun ownership by African Americans. If we add the expansion of drug trafficking, drive by shootings, car jackings, illegal gun ownership and other emotionally charged issues in American city the bias against firearms ownership is explosive!
Should citizens of the American population have "unrestricted" access to firearms ownership? No! There are logical reasons to legally control the ownership of various armaments. Believe it or not as a citizen you can own a tank but there are specific conditions you must meet in order to acquires one. Using a tank requires specific knowledge and other elements that warrant ownership restrictions.
The NRA, the shepherd of civilian firearms training, was mandated by the US Congress to train American citizens in the proper use of firearms and for the most part the organization fulfills that purpose. However, over the years because of the emotional thrust and reactive bias concerning, civil disobedience, improper use of guns, in our schools and on the streets of urban America, the organization has a public relations problem due bias concerning urban firearms laws .
The population of concerned citizens that have lost love ones to "gun related violence" have many citizens deeply concerned about firearms ownership. However, these concerns does not negate the Constitutional rights of citizens to own firearms. Firearms ownership is not a legal question, it is a question of ethics. This answer to the question can only be found in the heart of each American's ability to be sane while in possession of a firearm.