The point of the link I posted was that areas that have higher numbers of legally purchased firearms have higher rates of firearms related deaths. The guy who shot up the school in Virginia used legally purchased guns. I'm not saying that all people who buy guns legally are criminals, but enough of them are for it to be reasonable to ban them. Not to mention that there's no reason a citizen in an industrialized, liberal democratic society needs a gun. None. It poses an unnecessary risk for no gain.
However, a much better solution would be to prevent the root cause in the first place. In the case of the United States, violent crime could be curbed drastically by addressing the causes of crime. Inequality is a commonly highlighted cause of crime. The war on drugs and the blackmarket it has created is an absolutely gigantic contributor as well. I forget the statistic I had on Baltimore, but well over 50% of homicides were as a result of drug-related gang activity. These people, operating outside of the state, are the ones who carry and use weapons because they cannot go to the state for protection.
With that said, I believe economic reform is less likely than gun reform. A significant majority of Americans (something like 60-70% last I checked) favour stronger gun restrictions. Unfortunatly, I don't think significant economic or gun reform is likely in either Canada or the U.S., but I think gun reform would be easier to pass, especially in the short term.
It may also be time to hold gun manufacturers liable for the damage their products cause might curb their enthusiasm for selling and giving them away wrecklessly. The people who profit from the easy access to firearms take this threat seriously and are lobbying the US government to restrict the right of their victims to sue them.
/rant