Honest citizens championed prohibition hoping that banning an inanimate item would prevent misuse. The Twenty-first Amendment repealed it - because it didn't work.
Those who are anti Right to Keep and Bear Arms hope banning another inanimate item will work. However, "Gun Bans" don't work!
Nearly all the massive shootings in the USA have been where guns were banned - public buildings, churches, schools, nursing homes, etc. Killers intent gaining on fame, making a statement, mayhem, and murder are drawn to these "Unarmed Victim Zones." Many plan suicide.
"Bans" don't stop criminals. It points them to their victims. However, these "Bans" do prevent law-abiding citizens from having the tools to defend themselves.
Repeatedly, carnage is predicted when a State relaxed restrictions on law-abiding citizens carrying handguns. It hasn't happened. Serious crime rates go down when the restriction go down.
However, in places like Washington, New York, Chicago, Mexico, and England the gun crime rates are increasing -- in spite of their draconian restrictions on guns.
Why would a criminal to obey a "Gun Ban" restriction, while ignoring various felony laws, against the use of handguns in a crime, murder, etc.?
Why would they worry about any consequences, if planning suicide?