What, in your opinion, justifies a gun being banned?

The caliber of the gun.

The way it looks. (Intimidating appearance)

The amount of rounds the clip holds.

How fast the gun can be repetitively fired.

The way people label it (assault weapon)

Should all guns except those used to hunt be banned? (And, how would you define a 'hunting' gun?)

All the above?

I have found that people (not necessarily you) who back this ban and attempt to justify it usually know absolutely nothing about guns and have most likely never even shot one. This law is a politically motivated law and nothing more. The brain children of this ban basically looked at a bunch of pictures of guns and picked out the ones that looked mean and decided they'd ban them. The problem is that there are dozens more just as lethal and perform just as well that aren't even included in the list of banned guns. The manufactures of the guns not included in the ban just made more, so realistically nothing was really accomplished except for making political points with their gun-hating base.

So they ban a gun, but I can still go get one that will do just as much damage. Doesn't make much sense. But, it's not the honest gun owner you have to worry about. To buy guns you have to go through a background check and there's a waiting period. Once you buy a gun it can be traced back to you. Criminals don't buy guns legally they get them from the black market and a lot of black market guns are smuggled into the US. I never would, but it's actually easier for me to buy a assault weapon off the street than it is to buy one legally.

Gun bans will never work unless you ban them all and that will never happen.