A good example is the UK. After they banned hand guns in 1997 they has a violent crime increase by 70% and a homicide increase of 50%. Gun control didn't reduce crime it made crime worse. An important thing to remember when comparing countries is that America has 317million people compared to the U.Ks 60 million. You have to look at murderer per capita not a murders together in numbers. We have more people than all other countries accept China and India so we have more crime. Also Chicagoand D.C have strict gun laws but they hav a lot more crime than other American cities with less gun control. Also in places with conceal and carry laws there is a reduce in crime. Criminals don't know if their potential victim could be armed and are less likely to try and commit an act of crime against them. A study showed that many prison inmates (I forget the study it's on just facts.org gun control and I forget the exact numbers) are in prison because they were caught because their victim had a gun, didn't commit a crime because they were afraid their potential victim had a gun, knew someone (a fellow inmate) who didn't commit a crime because they were afraid their potential victim had a gun or had been caught because their victim had a gun.
Okay so, I'm confused. I'm the con for "Gun bans reduce crime rates" and you're the pro. Shouldn't you be trying to argue that gun bans do reduce crime rates?
Also, just to be factual I'm pretty sure "After they (UK) banned hand guns in 1997 they has a violent crime increase by 70% " is incorrect. I didn't get numbers for the entire UK, only England and Wales. According to the British Home Office the violent crime (includes assault, robbery, rape and murder) rate in England and Wales was 10260 incidents/100,000 people in 1995 and 4927 in 2010 [1, page 41 and 43]. The homicide rate did increase for a brief period though. In 1996 it was 1.14, in 2003 it was 1.79 and in 2010 it was 1.11 [2, page 32].