Don't confuse gun control with banning guns. If we look at Australia for example, a country often cited in regards to gun control (and I live there), guns are not banned. You can buy a gun, I have family with guns, there are gun shops. But there are restrictions on the type of gun you can buy, 12 gauge shotgun for duck shooting is ok, AR-15 for people shooting is a no go.

But the big difference is the culture, most people in Australia simply don't want to own a gun, it doesn't define who they are. They don't feel threatened or unsafe by not having one.

>Why do we think that we could anymore keep guns out of the hands of criminals than we could keep drugs out of the hands of people

Your equivocation seems to imply that gun regulation would either have either no or negative effect on gun ownership and usage. Yet other countries with stricter gun laws than the US have fewer incidents of gun violence, which would appear to suggest that it is, in fact, possible for gun laws to be effective at limiting gun violence.

The question, then, is not whether gun laws can keep guns out of the hands of criminals, but whether one believes they should.

I didn't say it wouldn't have any effect. I'm saying that that the trade off of giving the government more power to lock people up isn't worth it. The criminal justice system has harmed far more lives by locking up non violent offenders than gun violence.