It’s not that it won’t be 100% effective. It’s that we already have data that shows it doesn’t make a difference or in other words isn’t effective. The biggest place where people point to it being effective in Australia, and the US had a larger decline in gun homicide rate over the same time period. If it was actually effective, then Australia would have had a much larger decrease in homicide rate. Then there’s also the data that says violent crime rates increased in Australia while they decreased in the US. Not only did banning guns not make a difference in homicide rate vs. not banning them, their people became less safe overall due to an increase in other violent crime. People just ignore that inconvenient reality, since it doesn’t fit their opinion.
Chicago has some of the strictest gun control laws in the country yet one of the highest homicide rates. Do you think making guns illegal is going to be any more effective than prohibition or making heroin illegal? Heroin is so readily available that it’s killing 3x as many people per year as gun homicides. Gangs already have the trafficking process established. They can just add guns to their drug trafficking operations.
People point to the 10,000 gun homicides a year (most of which are gang on gang) while completely ignoring the 2.5M instances of lawful gun ownership protecting people from crime. That’s a 250:1 ratio of good vs. bad. There are 300M guns in the US, so only 0.0033% of them are used in a homicide each year. You mentioned airbags. Would you advocate banning airbags if they save millions of lives but 0.0033% of the time they can cause a death if used incorrectly?