Read between the lines all you want but a loaded gun will always be more dangerous then any other household weapon. I think of accidental knife drop vs an accidental gun firing and which one is more dangerous. It is clear and documented that countries with guns (like america) have more people attempting to murder or commit suicide then countries without [pretty much unlimited] access to such weapons (like Canada)
Guns dont kill people, people kill people, but when a person has a gun they can kill easier and kill more people.
The reason I find the "guns dont kill" argument ironic is that often the very same people who say this and thing guns get a bad rep refuse to support better mental health programs andbackground checks to keep guns away from the minority of crazy peoe who want to kill people. Maybe if they advocated for these, people wouldnt be as wary of gun ownership because it would make it easier to keep guns in the hands of responsible people.
Saying that we shouldn't put restrictions on guns because 'people kill people' is ridiculous. It's like saying that we should have no restrictions on nuclear weapons, because nukes don't kill people, people kill people. It's a flawed argument, and with how easy it is for anyone to get a gun today, it's really no wonder there's so many shooting deaths in America. For example, in the UK where guns are effectively outlawed, the average gun deaths per 100k is 0.25, while the US sits at over 40x that (10.30 per 100k). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
While I agree that technically people kill people, it is important to note that using a gun is an easy medium in order to kill someone. We have been phasing out knives, and bringing up more guns, and thus we are having more deaths because of firearms. It's just silly.
Easy accessible guns are a problem. Every schizoid idiot can go and steal a gun and kill 300 people. But he won't be able to kill more than a few if he has a knife, unless he's a damn ninja. The constant gun imagery thrown at us, the idea that it gives you power and safety, the idea that there's always something we should fear near us is responsable for too many deaths. Symbolically, guns kill people, but the real responsables are the people that make money off guns.
"Guns don't kill people, people kill people" is perhaps one of the more ignorant statements one can make about the gun control controversy. While true in one sense, it's a meaningless turn of phrase that glibly ignores the fundamental issue. The question is whether the presence of a gun leads to a greater number of deaths than would have occurred in the absence of guns. Obviously, multiple factors contribute to violence and some planned violence might not be stopped by the absence of a gun, but it's intuitive and supported by evidence that the presence of a gun isn't the soothing balm that pro-gun fanatics would have us believe.
Guns are inaminent objects. They don't have brains that tell their bodies to go and kill someone or emotions that cause someone to kill their spouse in the heat of the moment. They are tools. Spoons don't give people diabetes. Pencils don't misspell words. Guns don't kill people. Someone who wants to kill will do so with a nother weapon of a black market gun. I don't like guns, hunting of any of that type of stuff but I understand that they are used to prevent hundreds of thousands of crimes a year and to prevent up to 400,000 deaths a year. When seconds matter the police are minutes away.
People should stop blaming guns for their own failure. Instead of blaming materialism for our failure, we need to address the core problem which is bad parenting of children. In poor neighborhoods, while the father and mother are gone, the children are getting bad father figures. This is the problem. It is upbringing.
All people have brains in the head. Generally because why people die from guns are because the murderer is mental. Their are not thinking straight. People themselves grab the gun and kill the person. It wasn't the gun's fault. Guns can't be loyal. Their just an innocent object just like knifes. So do we have to bann sticks, just because a stranger hit me with the stick. NO!, it is the stranger it's self that wanted to hit me. In the UK, guns were banned and guess what, more people died because, they didn't had a gun to protect themselves. And the murderer thought about a knife. And yes, America is a larger nation than the UK. But overall America is safer than the UK. Like can the gun say no. Say that someone broke into my house and grabbed my gun and threatned my life. My gun isn't loyal it can't say ''no''. Because it is an object. People die no matter what. They just use guns, cause its easier for the murderer to use. So if we do bann guns, people are going to find a different concept of murdering people. So this is why materials don't kill people, it is the person it's self.
People kill people with ideas by bringing those ideas into reality. Very rarely have I heard of a murder where someone was killed with two bare hands, it's usually that they were stabbed to death or shot to death. There's often a tool and humans use the tool to do the killing. Without human interaction of any kind, a gun wouldn't kill.
Murder has been a problem for humans since the beginning of time. Of course a gun has made killing easier but it's more of a human problem than a gun problem because it all comes down to the person using the gun. After all we don't blame cars for being the reason a person is killed, we blame the driver, and same goes for the shooter.
The question is part of the problem. That's because the question is a distraction that prevents anything from happening that may help. And that's why it's so perfectly designed. It works flawlessly. And the answer doesn't matter at all.
The answer of course is people kill people, (a gun can't actually think), and a person can't shoot anyone without using a gun. So you can see how it's a false question. You can substitute a car in the same question. Do cars kill people, or do people's poor driving or road rage kill people? (Technically it's the bullet hitting someone causing damage and loss of blood that kills them).
What actually matters is keeping guns out of the hands of people who will use them to kill people. The only way to do that is to have tighter gun control laws, penalties, and make them much harder to obtain.
Arguing what kills people, 'people or guns' is a back and forth debate set up by the NRA lobbyists and politicians to keep us from enacting something that would actually be helpful. (Go figure, lobbyists and politicians trying to keep us ignorant).
The real question is, how do we keep guns out of the hands of people who intend to do harm? Of course the answer will be, 'guns don't kill people, people kill people'. But as you can see, that doesn't answer the question. The question is, 'how do we keep guns out of the hands of people who intend to do harm?' And the false debate continues. And the NRA smiles, and says, cha-ching!!!
I think that guns are perfectly safe, if used by people who have been taught how to use them correctly. My dad is a police officer. He grew up in the country. When I was younger, my favorite thing to do was go out back and just go target shooting. I was taught how to use one safely, and grew up with proper morals. It is my opinion actually, that everyone learn morals and how to properly use a gun. If everyone had a gun, how well do you think all these shootings would go? The criminal would pull out his gun, and have everyone else in the room pointing one at him. Even if you get rid of guns completely, crimes and murders will Still happen,like Australia found out a while back when they melted all guns down, even $10,000 dollar guns, and the crime rate actually went up. If we get rid of guns, people will use other weapons, even illegally get guns, and everyone else will be completely helpless.
If a random person picks up a gun, they probably wouldn't know how to turn off the safety, let alone shoot someone. But if they pick up a knife, it doesn't need training, it doesn't jam or malfunction, it doesn't run out of ammo, its silent, you cant trace it, and they're way cheaper. If you wanted to kill someone, would you go to the store, purchase a gun, wait a week till you can pick it up, then kill them? Or would you go get a kitchen knife and stab them. People, let's be real. If it's not guns, it's knives, baseball bats, crowbars, or fists. People will always have to deal with murder. Now you can prepare to defend yourself with a weapon, or you can put a "No Guns" sticker on your car. You decide.
A man with a gun is as dangerous as man without a gun. The gun can be used for good or for bad, it is the person behind the gun, the mentally insane one, or the gun can be used for good, lets say a robber comes in to your house if you had a gun he could be taken to jail and you would be unharmed, if you did not have a gun at a moments notice you would be dead or not have your belongings. Even if you ban a guns murders, robbers, extremists, rapists and other kinds of bad people will not give there guns and can harm people. Also people will find other was to harm another, rocks, knives, fists or whatever they can find. Another reason blaming guns is switching the blame from the evildoer to an inanimate object.
A gun is a big metal object that could be used as a paperweight without bullets and a person to pull the trigger. The saying that guns don't kill people is inane. A catchy phrase. But not true. If it were not for people a gun would not even exist. So from the making of to the pulling of the trigger, a person was the first and last to touch the gun.