The Japanese supreme commander during WW2 said "I would never invade the United States as there is a gun behind every blade of grass. A defected general of the 70s Soviet union when being debriefed by the CIA said "We knew we could take the U.S. military but we didn't invade because we knew we couldn't hold the U.S. because of armed citizens". Guns have saved millions of lives I have lifted a gun twice in response to violence an twice a hot headed individual calmed a bit.
The entire idea of gun control through legislation is to keep people who would break the law and shoot someone from getting a gun. The problem with this is that if a person is willing to break the law in order to harm or kill someone, it is unlikely that they won't be willing to break the law in order to get a gun. Such an individual may simply steal a gun or buy it from an illegal dealer. This flaw demonstrated by the fact that no gun control measure has been shown to lead to a drop in violent crimes. Instead, violent crimes often show a decrease when access to guns is increased, so that law abiding people may defend themselves.
Yes, I do agree with his opinion on gun control in this country, and the effect that guns can have. Guns can save peoples lives, and instead of taking guns away from people, we need more people to have guns on them, to fend off those who use them wrongly.
I do agree with John Stossel's position on gun control. He basically believes that assuming crimes will be reduced with different gun control laws is simply a myth that doesn't hold true. I believe this as well. Criminals, the people who are going to do harm with a gun, will obtain them regardless of the laws.
Typically, when we think gun control we think about states that limit gun ownership or the ability to carry guns in public. I think that restricting a populace from owning and carrying guns is not conducive with the American spirit. What kind of guns a citizen may own, and how we decide to allow them to own it is where the restrictions should at least be standardized. In the current state-run systems of purchasing guns, gun ownership may be declined in one state, and simply cross a line on a map and a gun can be purchased by that same citizen. That is the kind of gun control that the US should adopt. Limiting how a gun looks (assault rifles vs hunting rifles) or how many bullets a magazine carries does nothing. It only takes one bullet to take a life, and that bullet does not care whether there is a picatanny rail on the barrel or not. The shooter decides that.
Guns are inherently dangerous, just like cars. The law acknowledges the risk of cars not by banning cars, but by regulating car drivers. Everyone has to have a valid driver's license and proof of insurance to drive a car. If a car driver gets into an accident, that driver is held responsible and has to have insurance to pay for any injuries caused. Everyone should have to do the same for a gun. That way, if a gun owner willingly or accidentally hurts or kills someone with their gun, they will be held responsible.