Are there some guns people should not have and some people who should not have guns?

Well, there are restrictions in place now. Civilians don't have access to all the weaponry that the military possesses. So we do seem to decide that some weapons are weapons of war and some are fine for hobbyists, hunting, or personal protection. I do think that the weaponry accessible to the military and civilians (including cops) should be different, as they are now. But I don't know enough about weaponry and firearms to say which ones beyond the fact that we usually restrict fully automatic firearms to the military.

Yes, and yes.

And Congress, or better yet, state legislatures (since Congress hasn't preempted the issue by passing meaningful laws on the issue) should make laws picking what guns are not to suitable for private ownership, who can own them, and where they can carry them.

Once they do that, if someone thinks their 2nd Amendment right has been infringed, they can take it to Court and we'll see if the law violates the Constitution.

I'm not going there.

I was called out for being a socialist libtard coward for simply calling for hardening schools.

Criminals and mentally imbalanced shouldn't have them and immature people and those who are not willing to get proper training.

Pea shooters, just for how annoying they are.

jackjacson can i say is this an hypothetical question as in the united states I thought in one of the amendments all american citizens had right to bare arms

Yes, of course. The question is, who gets to decide who gets the yea or nay.

"...shall not be infringed."