...every so often a white supremacist kills someone with a car … but I’ve not heard of thousands of them driving through schools, concerts, sporting events ..or even churches..

We’ll get to keep most of our guns ... but there need be some serious uniformly enforced restrictions on both capacity and design.

The next thing ‘they’ll wanna do’ is restrict our right to own surface-to-air missiles, or turn in our tanks, or flame throwers… Yes, fear for your perceived rights ~

Importantly, we require someone be licensed, including skill and knowledge tests, to operate a motor vehicle on public roadways. More testing required for certain classes of vehicle.
For firearms, we rely on a deeply flawed background check system to simply determine whether they have committed felonies, committed misdemeanors of domestic violence, been dishonorably discharged from the military, or deemed mentally incapable by the courts (contrary to popular belief, being committed involuntarily is not the same as "adjudicated mentally defective" ).
No gun safety test, no skills test, no assurances a person will safely store firearms. Hell, we barely ask that people refrain from knowingly selling their gun to someone who legally cannot own one. We certainly do not require a person actually verify the identity or eligibility of the person buying their personal firearm (in most states--universal background checks have been passed in a couple places). Many states have concealed carry permits, but some of those require no training or testing, just a background check, just like buying. And that often allows the background check for buying to be skipped.
I was once a pretty hard line gun rights advocate. I sold guns for a number of years. I still own guns. I know we can do better.

@Drewesque yet we do two ter testing for driver license and they still kill more people ... so you point is?

@Rdurham vehicles are driven daily by many drivers, all day by commercial drivers, and in all sorts of conditions. Accidental deaths occur. Very rarely, intentional deaths occur.
Most firearm owners do not even utilize their guns once a week. For use/death ratio, it is hard to say that the number of fatal accidents in millions of miles driven is comparable to guns.
My point is that we can do more to prevent tragedy without taking away guns. Licensing, testing, and requiring gun safety education would be far from the gun grab people fear. Would it completely stop gun violence? No. But it might slow it down.
We could also start providing tax incentives to proper storage of firearms--make safes tax-deductible, not charge sales tax on them, or even subsidize them to encourage their use. If the problem is stolen firearms, as some say, we should encourage safe storage and prompt reporting of theft. Again, not a panacea, but an aid.

@Drewesque the everyday american isnt out killing people. it the bat shit crazy one.
gun laws don't work i live in the dmv area and i know for a fact that don't work.. Well they work in a way to keep gun for honest american but the crimminals still have them.

How it is going to slow it down when you get go to a corner and buy a gun.. They can't even stop drugs and you think they can stop guns.
I'm not sure how you looking at this but in not in the way of the real world.

I'm not in favor of a lot of restrictions on firearms but still, I can't stand an illogical argument. Cars are vital for people's day to day activities. Cars have a very important use: transportation. Guns have one use: killing. That's why we talk about banning guns, not cars.

In countries where guns are banned you sometimes see mass killing with knives. Why isn't anyone talking about banning knives? Because that would seriously handicap people from being able to prepare food. Knives have a vital purpose even though they are also used for killing.

There are a lot of legitimate arguments against gun restrictions but this isn't one of them.

@Rdurham Better education and improved background checks might lead to fewer accidents and fewer guns falling into the wrong hands. Universal background checks won't stop a person from selling their buddy a gun under the table, but they might stop someone from selling to a stranger who might not be legal to own one. Incentivizing proper storage might keep some from being stolen.
Nothing is a quick fix, but some things can help. I am not advocating bans and confiscation, but laws that might make things slightly safer.
Hell, even just improving reporting to NICS and their funding for checks would go some way. Plenty of denied sales are already out the door from the 3 day delay before they come back denied. Some jurisdictions are not promptly reporting convictions. Neither of those fixes even add the inconvenience of a skills and safety test to the gun buyer. I still say that is not an onerous restriction, though.
It is the attitude of all-or-nothing that makes this so hard. "It won't stop every crime" is not a reason not to improve. Likewise, the people calling for gun bans are going too far. We need to look at realistic, reasonable fixes to our laws and systems. They can help without being perfect or onerous.

@Meili IT use as a comparison. Gun are useful ever try to kill a deer with your bear hand not going to happen...
Anyway people see what they want to see..AS for car is as many uses have you ever heard of vehicle manslaughter.

@Drewesque Not matter what you do people will continue to complain about guns.
There nothing you can really do if someone really want to get a gun... All this talk about gun enforcement just mean im scare and i want to take there guns away..
We have enforcement some states are better then others but we do have them..

Again if someone really wants a gun there nothing anyone can do to stop them... You can create all the law you want and they will find a way to get them.

They would just turn it into more guns if they could.