Todd,

What you say has merit, but here is their survey data of the criminals based on states based on the avilability of firearms.

In states with widespread gun ownership and tough punishment for gun misuse, criminals surveyed were often unarmed: 54% in Oklahoma, 62% in Georgia, 40% in Maryland, 43% in Missouri, and 35% in Florida. In Massachusetts, however, only 29% of the felon-respondents were unarmed. In that state, it is difficult lawfully to acquire a firearm, and the illegal carrying of a firearm, rather than the criminal misuse of a gun, is subject to the mandatory penalty. The survey data indicate that the criminals' fear of an armed victim relates directly to the severity of the gun laws in the state surveyed. Where gun laws are less restrictive, such as Georgia and Maryland, criminals think twice before running the risk of facing an armed victim; they are much less concerned in Massachusetts.

Fear acts as a driver to a good percentage of criminals as to whether or not they carry a gun, at least based on this research.

As far as applying any logic to a complete whacko or sociopath, Fresh Prince is correct. There is no guessing what they will do. If guns aren't available, they'll resort to home made Sarin gas, or machette's, or any other sort of weapon available, as examples have shown in the past.

I'd rather have legislation based on society as a whole, and based on facts and statistics, rather than managing to the lowest common denominator. The problem then "lies" in who's statistics you use.