Strict gun control does help to fight violence and crime. It is just a start though. Less guns means less chances of violence and crime. The issue is it is not going to stop the violence and crime. People will still find a way to get new weapons and commit crimes.
The only way a person can commit crime with a gun is if the can have one. By introducing strict gun regulation laws the probability of getting a gun goes down dramatically. Gun control works, period. Look at the UK. Very few gun deaths because of their regulatory gun control.
Gun control doesn't prevent all crime, and criminals obviously don't care anyway, but making it harder for criminals to get guns may reduce the amount of gun related crime. In nations with little or no guns the amount of gun related crime is generally lower than in nations, such as the US, where there is a large number of guns.
Yes, I agree with this, if there are more gun control some how crime has to decrease, because if there is not access to the guns then how are people going to use them in violent situations, gun control is key in reducing crime ridden streets and communities. It all works together.
After the 1997 ban they saw their crime rate go up 70% and their murderer rate 40% (home office) guys really? Because they have less gun deaths they live in a safer place?. Who cares if they have less gun crime? They have more crime over all. They 125% More rape victims than we do. They have 2034 violent crime victims per 100,000 people. We have 466 violent crime victims per 100,000 people. Stop kidding your selves. I would feel very uncomfortable by my self in London. I would also feel very uncomfortable in Chicago which is Americas crime capital. Chicago also has the most gun control. How about D.C. Their crime rates are through the roof. New York. Same. Lots of gun control and lots of crime. In Houston, San Antonio and other cities with conceal and carry crime is low.
All it will do is temporarily SLOW gun violence NOT stop it ............. ...... . . . . . . .Guns are easy to obtain and the higher caliber and higher power guns like the ithica shotguns or ak-12 or scorpion or uzis even stop obsessing over SOMETHING THAT CANT BE EASILY SOLVED AND THINK ABOUT IT- from of t.H.E.K.I.D.
Seeing as how guns have only been around for a short amount of human history and there seems to be this long lasting historical trend that people have a tendency to kill one another I don't think guns make a damn difference. Pick your poison. Do you want shot, stabbed, blown up, bludgeoned, poisoned, or strangled? Several countries that have banned most types of firearms are experiencing spikes in knife violence. China even experience a large scale terrorist attack with over 100 casualties with the latest super weapon.......Wait for it......DRUM ROLL......TADA!!!!! KNIVES! Some countries, such as the UK, are now going as far as banning several types of knives, and even proposing bans on even kitchen knives! So should we just live in a world where we use plastic cutlery? And even so would that work? Anyone ever hear of a homemade blackjack? If I want to kill you I can take a boot sock, put a rock in it and crack your skull. Should we ban socks while we're at it?
I do not believe stringent gun control laws decrease violence or lower crime rates. Creating stricter laws only makes the black market grow, where anyone can obtain the firearms they want. It does not work when you make restrictions tighter, in fact, it make people want to obtain the firearms even more.
Stringent gun-control does not decrease violence and crime. This is because stringent gun-control has been put in enforcement before, and the criminals who contribute to violence and crime continue to use guns for criminal acts. Violence and crime is not decreased in this manner at all, and never will be.
Stringent gun-control does not decrease violence and crime. If the criminals want to have a gun then they will find a way to get one. The only thing that stringent gun-control does is limit the people that need these items for protection. More guns would end up in the hands of criminals and we would not be able to defend ourselves.
The USA is ranked #1 in guns/capita out of all the countries in the world, but about #50 in homicide rate. When comparing the Brady score and the violent crime rates of all 50 states in the USA, there is no correlation between the two. When comparing the rape rates of developed countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark and Japan are examples) with their guns/capita there is not a significant correlation between the two stats.
In 1997 the UK implemented a handgun ban. The homicide rate in England and Wales increased by 36% from 1996 to 2003 and decreased back down to the 1996 rate by 2010. It is worth noting that the homicide rate in the USA fell by 30% from 1996 to 2003 and another 15% from 2004 to 2010. Unless there were some sweeping gun control laws in the USA that I missed, I'm thinking that gun control has a negligible or positive (increasing) effect on homicide rates.
No, stringent gun-control does not decrease violence and crime, because the only people who abide by the strict laws are law-abiding people to begin with. Just like locking a door will only keep a law-abiding person from entering, so will gun control laws only prevent law-abiding people from obtaining certain weapons.
No, stringent gun control does not decrease violence and crime, because most gun violence is committed with guns obtained illegally. People who are intent to commit crime and control cities through gang violence and other means will find a way to continue to use guns, regardless of gun control. Guns will continue to be sold illegally and on the street, and trying to control guns will not decrease violence.
If guns are taken away, then the criminals will still get them- they have already broken the law, so why not continue? Plus, then all the law- abiding citizens would be defenseless! Also, all the mass murders of the recent past have been committed by people proven to be mentally ill- and the government has no budget for the mentally ill.