For all of those people that are against gun control, just look at how gun control has worked in the U.K. They banned guns and now gun violence is basically non existent. There is more crime committed with knives, true, but there are also fewer fatalities because of this. It works.
The faults in gun advocates arguments are endless, but one of the primary ones pertaining to this is the assumption that everybody who wants to illegally obtain a gun will know how to. That simply isn't true. Will stricter gun control eliminate gun violence? Of course not, we've been in this lunacy far too long for anything to. Will it reduce gun violence? It's basic logic to say yes, it will.
Has US drug policy ridded the streets of drugs? Pot is against the law, but it can be found right now in any middle school or high school or college in America.... Right now, ask your kids. Remember, it is not 'gun violence', it's VIOLENCE. You don't call it car violence when someone uses his car to kill, do you? You don't say: baseball bat violence or hammer violence or pressure cooker violence now do you. This is just a ploy of left media to demonize the gun because they are weak on telling people that their behavior is wrong. The left can't even tell their own to not riot for God's sake!!
The right to assemble is just that, a right, but unlawful assembly by blocking roads, rioting and such is wrong. Get a damn permit like everyone else. Schedule it, provide port-a-johns and security and have at it. But tweeting your friends to come take over the highway infringes on my rights.
It's a simple case of common sense that if a criminal wants to commit a crime, like robbing a store for example, with a gun, then they will get that guy any way they can. The government can ban guns entirely from the U.S. soil, but that will not stop criminals from going overseas to get weapons. Hell, that even happens right now. They're already going to commit a felony, what's to stop them from committing another with some gun "control" act? The thing is, it won't prevent a criminal from being a criminal or lower crime rate. It may make a stupid thug rob a store with a butcher knife instead of a handgun, but criminals will just find other means.
After their 1997 ban the saw their crime rate go up 70% and their murderer rate by 40%. England had 125% more reps victims than America. They have 2034 violent crime victims per 100,000 people. In America we have 466 violent crime victims per 100,000 people. Guys is this even being debated? How about Mexico where 20,00 people are murdered every year. How about our own cities like Chicago, and D.C and NYC where crime is throrugh the roof. It's a fact that taking guns away from law abiding citizens only increases crime and endures that criminals have a deflensless victim. Guys let's stop kidding out selves and denying facts.
Though guns are used in a lot of the violent crimes in America, we have also seen that people are able to commit crimes through other means, including bombings (Boston Marathon, Oklahoma City, etc.). Before guns were so common and science got wise to it, people were often fatally poisoned. As long as people exist in the world who want to do bad things, they will find a way to do so, with or without guns.
Implementing new gun control measures will actually increase crime. It doesn't make a difference when the government makes it more difficult for citizens to legally acquire weapons. Criminals acquire their weapons illegally after all. With that in mind, gun control measures almost always cause an increase in gun related crimes.
I do not believe gun control will reduce crime. When you move to more strict laws and regulation, it simply creates more criminals, since people who will not give up firearms, are no longer law abiding citizens. I do not believe gun control will reduce crime for extended periods of time, because the black market will simply grow and people will still obtain the firearms they desire.
It would make crime harder, but in the long run criminals would still find a way to get away with crimes and violent crimes as they have been for years before. It would just put a damper on the amount of guns they would have access to and make it easier to track them down, but they would still find a way to side step the system as they already have with our current set up to fight crime.
To start off, I would like to say I have nothing against background checks. It IS common sense to keep crazy people and criminals with significant crimes (i.E, not littering or any other minor crime, unless it has to do with violence). But talking about banning guns is ridiculous. Pro-gun control (or as I call them, anti-rights) people continuously site, correctly, that Europe has strict gun control and lower gun violence. HOWEVER, there are countries like England, which has very strict gun control and is a relatively isolated country, being an island, which common sense would predict would be very low on crime. The violent crime rate is higher than the US! The US is number one in the gun ownership rate (88 per 100 people, 2011 statistics), but we were 28th in the gun homicide rate (2.97 people per 100,000). In the UK, the violent crime rate was 2,034 per 100,000 people; in the US, 466 per 100,000 people. In addition, after almost all the states legalized concealed carry, there was a drop in crime (maybe just a correlation, maybe a cause). Not to mention, the majority of gun related crime is committed in places where guns are illegal or strictly controlled - New York, D.C., Chicago, etc. In contrast, one town, in the South, made a law where all citizens must carry arms - crime dropped in that town.