Advocates for Firearm Possession
There are nearly 200 million guns in private hands as a part of recreation (hunting and target shooting) but are now being used against people during commission or defense against crime. Advocates for firearm possession consider them an important source of protection while control advocates condemn them for the damage they do in the hands of criminals. The data collected from various research surveys illustrate the scale of the problem. According to a research by Politifact there have been 1,516,863 gun-related deaths on US soil since 1968 until 2015, compared with the 1,396,733 war deaths that include revolutionary war, The Mexican war, the civil war(Union and Confederate), the Spanish-American war, the first world war, the second world war, the Korean war, the Vietnam war, the Gulf war, the Afghanistan war, the Iraq war along with other conflicts in other countries including Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, Somalia and Haiti. Out of the 33,000 gun violence deaths that take place each year, about 500 (1.5%) are a result of mass shootings. Suicides cause two-third deaths.
United States Government
As per the data validated until 19th of February, 2018, for the year 2018 there have been 7,168 incidents related to gun violence out of which 1,984 have caused deaths whereas 3,434 have caused fatal injuries. Out of these, 34 of them have been cases of mass violence which has seen an upward trend over the years.  Currently, the right to keep and bear arms in the United States is protected by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which has remained to be largely debatable by various sections of the crowd. The people eligible to possess and own firearms within the United States (with further restrictions) include ‘US citizens, permanent resident aliens and non-immigrant aliens admitted into the United States for lawful hunting or sporting purposes or if the non-immigrant falls under one of the following exceptions : possesses a valid hunting license/permit issued by any US state, official representative of a foreign government who is accredited to the United States Government or the Government’s mission to an international organization having its headquarters in the US or is enroute to or from another country to which that alien is accredited, official of a foreign government or a distinguished foreign visitor who has been so designated by the Department of State, a foreign law enforcement officer of a friendly foreign government entering the United States on official law enforcement business or someone who has received a waiver from the Attorney General as long as the petition shows this would be in the interests of justice and would not jeopardize the public safety under 18 U.S. Code § 922(y)(3)(c).” 
Primary and Secondary Market
The firearms market is constituted of two types of markets, namely primary and secondary. The primary market involves acquisition of new and secondhand firearms from federal firearms licensees. FFLs require customers to provide identification and sign a form that validates the fact that they aren’t prohibited from buying a firearm along with conducting a proper criminal background check on the customers. A privately owned gun can be transferred in ways not involving FFLs through classified ads and at gun shows. This constitutes the secondary market for firearms. Young offenders have been noted as active in illegal market both as buyers and sellers of guns through their networks of friends, family and street sources. These guns also have high value in exchange and are used by the youth to trade for money, drugs or other items like video games, phones etc.
The vast majority of Americans support gun control and yet the Congress has failed to toughen laws even in the wake of a series of mass shootings, the primary reason for this being National Rifles Association (NRA) pouring money into political races at record levels for gun lobbying. It has spent US$4.1 million on lobbying in 2018- as compared to US$3.1 million it spent in 2016.  Along with lobbying, the Supreme Court’s Citizens United’s decision allowing NRA to be open for independent expenditures has enabled groups and individuals to back or attack candidates. A lot of the organization’s strength also stems from the support of the voters and its ability to push an agenda that appears out of line with the general demographic, which is in favor of stricter gun laws.
Pro-gun activists frequently use a quote made by Mahatma Gandhi to suggest that Gandhi supported individual gun ownership which goes as follows: “Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.” In this passage Gandhi references India’s Arms Act (1878) which gave Europeans the right to carry firearms and prevented Indians from doing so, unless they were granted a license by British colonial government. The full text of his quote goes like: “Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest. If we want the Arms Act to be repealed, if we want to learn the use of arms, here is a golden opportunity. If the middle classes render voluntary help to the Government in the hour of its trial, distrust will disappear, and the ban on possessing arms will be withdrawn.”
Gandhi and Nonviolence
Gandhi wanted Indians to fight in World War I to prove themselves trustworthy with arms and fit for citizenship, and claiming that he was pro-gun ownership is an oversimplification of his views. However, he did not oppose the use of violence in some circumstances, preferring it to cowardice and submission, he still remained a staunch advocate for nonviolence his entire life. Gandhi’s absolute refusal to use firearms and his quote during his work with the ambulance corps in England in 1914 which says “A rifle this hand will never fire” serve as powerful evidences refuting the claims made by the pro-gun activists. In fact after the replacement of the old Arms Act of 1878 with the 1959 Arms Act and the supplemental Arms Rules of 1962, he didn’t speak out against the Arms Act of 1858 again as he didn’t consider it significant enough to advocate against and remained adamant about establishing nonviolence as a principle of state policy.