Gun laws need to be more strict rather than banning them

Hello, THE_OPINIONATOR, and thanks for challenging me to this debate. I'd first like to thank my opponent and assure him that I believe myself to be an honorable person, and will not vote or try to otherwise influence the outcome of this debate by asking others to. If I win, it will be because of my arguments and not because I cheated. First of all, I'd like to start off with a simple statement: Guns should be banned. Why? This is what I will be explaining in my first speech. I. Guns kill people. How else would people be committing crimes and such? With guns, not only can people kill others, it makes it less dangerous for them [it's not as likely they will get caught, since these are ranged weapons and they can shoot from a distance] to shoot people. Therefore, having a gun has two major outcomes; A) allows people to kill people, and B) indirectly encourages people to kill others, in that it is both easier and safer. II. The Proposition is likely to state that guns are people's protection; without guns, they would not be able to protect themselves from the people that do have guns. Guess what? If people didn't have guns in the first place, they wouldn't be attacking those people, and so those people would not need protection! III. More gun access means more deaths. I quote [awesomelibrary.org/guncontrol]: "The Brady Center argues that when the civilian population has more access to guns, more teens and children die from gun wounds. For example, during a year when over 5,000 teens and children died from gun wounds in the USA, in Great Britain, where gun ownership is very restricted, 19 teens and children died from gun wounds." What does this tell us? The more people have guns, the more crimes are committed, the more people are killed. If we abolish the law that allows people to have guns, then the amount of deaths should GREATLY decrease. IV. The Proposition may state that this a matter of public safety. Yes, it is a matter of public safety, BECAUSE of guns. Despite the fact that there will still be crimes and murder with or without guns, guns are responsible for the majority of these incidents. V. I'd also like to point out that we are banning guns from normal citizens. That does not mean we should ban them all together. Police and other security officers [the likes] may still be in possession of a gun. This also means that public safety will be less of an issue, since the culprits will not have guns and the officials will. VI. The Constitution says in its second amendment: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The Constitution clearly indicates guns are allowed to protect citizens. But now, times are changing, and the circumstances are different. Banning guns will help the safety of citizens even more. We need to make a constitutional amendment. I'd also like to ask my opponent to explain how he intends the gun laws to be more strict. Understand, people, that others like you are DYING out there. We cannot allow such an amount of mass deaths to happen. We have ignored it so far, and now we must face the truth; guns are bad. This requires a constitutional amendment. We need to ban guns. Thank you, all of you, once again, and please vote for the Opposition.