The first contribution draws futuristic scenarios for the 21st century, depending on whether public opinion can be modified to relinquish the handgun as an instrument of household self-defense and whether citizens will submit to Federal regulation, given the unworkability of State and local inconsistencies in handgun control. An article weighing the wisdom of gun prohibition warns against it, basing its arguments on lessons learned from prohibiting marihuana and alcohol. Public opinion polls are reviewed in two articles assessing popular thinking about the regulation of private arms in the United States. The impotence of firearms legislation enacted between the World Wars is explained by the low enforcement priorities of the Justice Department, the individualist ethos hostile to Federal intervention, and powerful and shrewd lobbying efforts that neutralized the legislative outcome. Among the articles evaluating effects of policy changes, one contends that a reduction in gun availability would cause some weapon substitution and little probable change in overall robbery and assault rates, except for that of homicide. Another analyzes the easily circumvented screening systems enforcing present laws in most States and recommends that retail dealers and private owners be more heavily regulated through civil liability and a more comprehensive registration system. An analysis of the sources from which criminals obtain guns points to the need for developing local enforcement capabilities and Federal regulatory efforts, rather than criminal investigation capabilities at the Federal level. In addition, one paper recommends methods for controlling the use of deadly force by police. Finally, three case studies assess the effects of the Bartley-Fox Amendment in Massachusetts, the District of Columbia's ban on handgun transfers, and Michigan's mandatory sentencing provisions for criminals who use guns. Tabular data and footnotes are provided with individual articles.