Would a ban on guns reduce crime in the United States?

Posted by: imabench

Vote
755 Total Votes
1

No

529 votes
131 comments
2

Yes

226 votes
43 comments
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Subutai says2013-10-06T18:55:30.9445134-05:00
Resurrecting that million-vote opinion, I see.
1817974 says2013-10-10T01:10:28.5682527-05:00
Baning guns wont reduce crime in the u.S.A but it will reduce murder rates
imabench says2013-10-10T01:13:08.0243820-05:00
You realize that murder is a crime right?
rammstauffenberg says2013-10-25T21:20:55.0575009-05:00
It is a faction of the problem.
Greematthew says2013-10-25T21:52:32.1111009-05:00
"Won't reduce crime, but will reduce murder rates" What
higa123 says2013-11-07T10:09:29.3128329-06:00
Fascinating prospect, but unfortunately, no. If you will notice, if you just outlaw guns one day, then everyone with a gun automatically becomes a criminal and makes for a HUGE spike in law-breaking activities (crime). However, this would be easily remedied, because all the people will give their guns to the gover- what? They won't? And there are too many guns to effectively force this ban? Oh, my bad. There are way too many guns to get them all - it's a logistical impossibility. Also, if I may, I can categorize who will and will not turn their guns in if this happens: law-abiding citizens, also known as normal everyday (non-criminal) people, will turn their guns in, and the criminals, thugs, drug-dealers, and killers won't. Bummer. So it seems you have a massively disarmed law-abiding populace, and an armed and dangerous criminal element in society. Not to mention the blooming underground market for illegal guns, and by illegal guns, I mean any guns. This will deprive the government of any money it was making off of gun sales, in addition to the immense costs of trying to get all the guns. Now, no doubt there are some people who will disagree with me, and I understand you have concerns. I think I can put your concerns to rest with real world examples. Let's look at the UK. Guns are basically banned in the UK, and homicides involving guns are virtually non-existent. You're probably wondering why I mentioned this, as it seems to illustrate how I am wrong - however, the question is about overall crime. The UK has a total gun ban, almost no gun crime, and is on a freaking island. However, crime is immense. Compared to the US, it has a higher crime rate and a higher violent crime rate, something to the tune of over double the US rates. Crime is so prevalent there, there are even groups trying to ban kitchen knives (Huh, criminals will use other things besides guns if there aren't any? Weird). Also, over the very recent history of the US (last 30 years or so), crime has been steadily declining (admittedly at a slow pace, but what do you expect?). This corresponded to an era where gun laws became more relaxed and allowed more guns. One town in the South (forgive me, my memory fails me as to the specific name of the town) created a required gun carry policy - you have to carry a gun in public. Crime went down there around 30%. Now, if you think I want everyone to have a machine gun at all times, you are wrong. I personally believe that if you are a sane, law-abiding, and mentally stable person, you should be able to get a gun if you want to, while going through the normal background checks. If you are not sane, not law-abiding, or not mentally stable, you shouldn't be able to get a gun.
0nePixel says2015-07-20T15:01:40.4429645-05:00
Well this depends on if government agencies are able to use guns even if they are banned. If they are I definitely think it will reduce crime rates. A problem arises when u set having a gun as a crime but I don't think the amount of people breaking the law of being in possession of a gun would exceed the amount of crimes that would be stopped by the ban on guns.
Berend says2015-07-20T15:56:40.5953163-05:00
I mean, it would create a black market and all, but I'm not sure there is much evidence to say a full ban will reduce crime in America. BEcause most of the shootings by people would not have gone to a black market to get a gun.
Mhykiel says2015-07-20T17:33:40.0849673-05:00
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf No. Fact is gun bans don't even lower murder rates. What good is making a law? Law breakers will not obey gun laws. The problem is crime, and the fix is gun education, drug prevention, and an economy that have growing stable careers. Maybe even bring back the assault rifle.
Oreo222 says2015-07-20T20:44:55.2915619-05:00
Personally, I just want background checks and ID registration to keep the crazies from owning guns.
Vere_Mendacium says2015-07-20T22:55:14.3689878-05:00
Well, it would obviously have an impact on gun crime, but would it reduce crime in general? I think not.. Or at least not much,, a gun is only a tool for leverage over another with a lesser tool, which is why cops, soldiers, and smart citizens carry them.. To protect themselves and others (unless you are a soldier in America, where you are usually disarmed when not in training or combat, or an MP). Crime rates may change slightly, but only when lazy criminals can't or won't think of anything to help them commit a crime outside of a gun. Otherwise, crime rates would only fluctuate annually in normal conditions, and at present, we are well below both median and average for assault rates compared to other nations; UK Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Finland, Ireland, Chech Republic, Slovakia, Norway are higher... Twice as high are; Austria Hungary, Germany, Greece, Russia, Slovenia, Denmark, Spain, Switserland, Luxemborg. Italy, & Netherlands.. And 3 TIMES as high is; France, Turkey, Sweden, Estonia, Protugal, Isreal, & Belgium... And much higher are Chile, Brazil, Mexico.... Other nations were not included, but his is a simple example of nations that outrank America in assaults.. Some having both legal and illegal stances on guns, but both, like the US, able to get guns regardless of the laws.. So I ask; if a nation were or were not to ban guns, would the crime rate really change that much? Would preventing innocent people from defending themselves who don't listen to laws from assaulting them really change with the law, or would it facilitate such assaults? US citizens need ask no further than Detroit or Chicago on what they think about laws preventing owning a gun how successful it has been there... The US is almost considered an out-liar when it comes to the number of gun ownership vs homicide rates; we have way more guns, but our homicide rate does not reflect such,, while a country like Greece or New Zealand have a fourth as many owned guns, but achieve nearly half as many homicides as the US. Israel, our 'best buddy' has a 15th of the number of owned guns, but also still achieves still half of our homicide rate. When talking about rates, it is important to realize what people mean by 'gun crimes'... There is a difference between homicides and assaults,, and while 'yes' the US is high on homicides relative to the rest of the world, which is aided by our gun ownership, in comparison to assaults, or general 'crime' we are very low,, so,, no,, removing gun ownership in America will not reduce crime,, it will only change how it is done, and thus reported. And as I already stated, this would actually result in worse numbers, as criminals would know they have a MUCH better chance of committing a crime uninhibited if they know no one does (legally) have a gun to defend themselves. Source: http://crimepreventionresearchcenter.org/2014/03/comparing-murder-rates-across-countries/
Jack_D says2015-07-21T00:47:52.3620642-05:00
This question is hypothetical. No way to test this answer. There is 0% chance this could happen, it's almost possible to get even moderate gun restrictions passed.
tajshar2k says2015-07-21T17:29:55.5949176-05:00
How the heck did this poll make the front page?? Its from 2013!
imabench says2015-07-22T13:26:54.0293624-05:00
I was wondering that myself, but its my poll getting popular again so WOOOO
TBR says2015-07-22T19:33:54.4730032-05:00
The old poll makes it to the frontpage.
Talkingisfun says2015-07-23T03:07:55.6056397-05:00
Studies have shown a clear correlation between high gun rates and high murder rates, both in high income countries (even when the US is excluded) and in different states in the US (even if corrected for income differences). (Source: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/). Of course correlation does not equal causation, but it sure is a pretty strong indication. Especially because a causal relationship would make sense: If you can get a device made purely for murdering people it seems probable that it will occasionally be used to murder people. The argument that "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is pretty terrible. I could make the same argument about nuclear weapons, but I think that we can all see why we wouldn't want everyone to have nuclear weapons.
jprice19 says2015-07-23T04:06:32.5926725-05:00
Please observe Australia
Talkingisfun says2015-07-23T04:12:10.5424215-05:00
What about Australia? It has a ban on on most guns (after a mass shooting) and it has a murder rate of 1.1 persons per 100.000. The US doesn't have this ban on guns, and it has a murder rate of 4.5 persons per 100.000. Once again, this correlation does not necesarily mean causation, but there is a very clear correlation.
laughingstock says2015-07-23T13:35:51.5768014-05:00
Here's how I view it. You can ban all you want, the fact is that those who seek out crime will commit it no matter what. Banning guns will not keep sociopaths or psychopaths from harming the masses with guns. Stricter regulations and screening processes should be implemented but that's a different discussion all together.
dmussi12 says2015-07-23T13:56:13.7076317-05:00
Australia had a compulsory buyback set up for newly banned guns, but this wouldn't work in the US since guns aren't registered. Not saying the correlation isn't moot, but bringing up Australia says nothing about what would happen if a similar ban were implemented here.
dan40000000 says2015-07-23T15:03:43.1351153-05:00
Just watched Schindler's list for the first time and I couldn't help but think if those people hadn't of been disarmed several years earlier maybe they would have been given the chance to fight back. Of course people will say a small militia can't defeat a military. While that is true they would have died either way but if it was you would you prefer dying fighting for your life and getting blown up in a building defending your friends and family OR have your daughters brutally raped over and over again and get sent to a death camp where any guard can either rape you or shoot you at any turn where your daughter/wife may be a prostitute for good male workers and you can starve to death? To me the choice is pretty clear I would much rather go down swinging. Plus if all the jews and civilians did this you don't think this would have hindered the German army a lot? It would have saved a lot of lives in the end. But like the people who voted yes here you would rather trust the government. History proves why that is such a terrible idea.
CoderatheGreat says2015-07-23T16:45:31.0803213-05:00
We need smart regulation of guns to make sure a violent criminal won't be able to grab a gun like he would a can of soda.
imabench says2015-07-23T19:01:03.6470853-05:00
"Plus if all the jews and civilians did this you don't think this would have hindered the German army a lot?" Dan..... The country of FRANCE couldnt even stop the German Army, and they actually had tanks and airplanes and automatic rifles..... Use your head.
TBR says2015-07-23T19:29:46.8770460-05:00
It's all part of the Red Dawn fantasy. WOLVEREENS!!!
actionguy777 says2015-07-23T19:36:47.8808070-05:00
@imabench, I think if people inside the country revolted during the war, that probably would've hindered them, maybe not much, but still quite a bit.
imabench says2015-07-23T19:48:13.5592496-05:00
The Nazi regime was driven completely by fear though. If Germans so much as spoke out against Hitler, there was a good risk they would be sent to concentration camps and never seen again. Fear is very powerful in keeping people from doing what they think is right, and on top of that, this was 1930's Germany.... People were more fearful of Communists more than the Nazi's for a time, so there were loads of reasons for Germans to not want to revolt other than not having access to guns
steven8 says2015-07-24T01:13:29.0158594-05:00
There were 51,688 gun incidents in 2014, only 12,560 were fatal accidents or crimes. (gun violence archives.Com) Switzerland trains their citizens to use guns so they can defend themselves and they have the world's lowest crime rates. They also haven't gone to war since 1815. Did you know that alcohol kills more people every year than guns. Did you know that Abortions kill more unborn babies each year than guns killing people. Did you know that car accidents kill more people than guns. Did you know that criminals who use guns 99% of the time acquire their guns illegally or by having some dumbass buy the gun for them, which is illegal. Did you know that Mexico banned guns, and doesn't even allow Americans take knifes across the boarder, yet it hasn't stopped gun violence at all. The drug cartels and other criminals still get guns and use them to terrorize innocent people. The Mexican government can give a rats behind. If they did they would not only legalize guns but they would train their citizens to use guns so they can defend themselves from the criminals. That's what Switzerland does and they of the lowest crime rates in the world.
kevin24018 says2015-07-24T15:10:24.3167950-05:00
Fertilizer bomb, pressure cooker bomb, anthrax in the mail, people will just find a different method, when liberals get to the core of the problem (mental health etc) instead of inanimate objects THEN maybe it would help, changing society is too difficult, so much easier to go after objects. How about the Tunisia beach? Gun free zones are dangerous places to be. Criminals don't follow laws, but we continue to beat that dead horse, don't we.
evilman2002 says2015-07-25T01:00:49.9422919-05:00
Leave the guns just don't give ammunition and then soon gun would not be effective
Cirdan says2015-07-25T23:57:28.3797406-05:00
Guns don't kill. People do.
TBR says2015-07-26T16:40:35.1368921-05:00
@Cirdan - I have never heard that put so elegantly. Did you just come up with that? You should trademark it, I bet it could catch on.
tajshar2k says2015-07-26T19:37:48.9134605-05:00
Gun crime, but not overall crime. Guns are used for defensive purposes million times a year. Check my debate for sources.
Couchsessel says2015-07-27T09:52:24.3847900-05:00
It probably wouldn't lower crime itself. I'm pretty sure it would lower the number of people dying from crime.
TwentyJuan22 says2015-07-28T19:20:46.9227185Z
No because we still have knives and other weapons so no it will not reduce anything.
Plexon_Warrior says2015-07-28T15:47:46.3857921-05:00
No. It wouldn't if you look at the UK you'll notice they have a gun ban, but also an extremely high crime rate (Great Britain actually experienced a rise in violent crimes). The truth is that criminals don't care about the law... That's why they are criminals. They would never hand over their guns, therefore you are disarming your law-abiding civilian population and giving the edge to the your criminal gangs, thugs, thieves and other various criminals. People who want to cause harm to others will always find a way to do so, hence the high bludgeon (beating one with a stick or other blunt impact weapon/ object) or stabbing crime rates in the UK.
Vere_Mendacium says2015-07-29T02:04:32.4291525-05:00
Thats a good point,, how does this, and other similar polls, make the front page? It is from 2013... Well,, I now know who is pulling strings at Debate.Org
Max.Wallace says2015-07-30T02:25:15.6406845Z
Murderers will commit murder. Gunslingers will prevent murderers from accomplishing their evil deed.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-07-30T17:02:32.1296347Z
@TalkingIsFun I don't think a potential decrease from 4.5% to 1.1% is something at all to fret over or restrict freedom over. Emphasis on 'potential'. Realistically it wont be as low as that without further restriction and regulation.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-07-30T17:05:22.0169283Z
Further restriction outside of firearms use I mean. Even if you had already banned all of them ... 1.1% is still pretty unattainable for the US ... If thats your goal.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-07-30T17:07:30.1735529Z
And thats assuming it would do anything really. Theres plenty of evidence to show that gun bans in other countries aside from Australia have maintained higher rates even without them.
Pastafarianisttroll says2015-07-31T21:33:13.8145885Z
It will lower it slightly at least
Pastafarianisttroll says2015-07-31T21:34:29.9292795Z
HAs anyone heard off the schemes were the take your gun and give you like 50 bucks no questions asked. Funny thing is ALOT of people do it
AsperACT says2015-08-01T16:50:03.1989823Z
The more you make something illegal the higher the price in the black market. You can't fight against economic forces with legislation.
TBR says2015-08-02T03:28:58.3411017Z
@AsperACT - That is a POSITIVE of gun control.
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-08-02T17:23:17.3708487Z
@TBR: Not necessarily. Since the price change was caused by an increase in demand, producer surplus must increase, which means more money is made from black market sales.
TBR says2015-08-02T17:25:10.1907719Z
Diqiucun_Cunmin - I am not disagreeing with that point, but would argue a net benefit from increased price on the black-market.
Caleb_30_06 says2015-08-02T21:58:33.3371196Z
@Talkingisfun I see what you're saying about Australia, I'm from there in fact. But in all honesty the gun crime rates were plummeting in the weeks before the bans. The government refused to accept this even though the statistics said otherwise. Another thing to take into account is population. Australia has a population of around 20 million whereas The US has a population of around 300 million. Now if you bear with me, in a country of over 300 million people, of course there's going to be crime, it's never going to stop. This is why some small European countries (Apart from the UK) have such low crime rates, their low populations make crime easier to keep an eye on. It's like a parent watching 3 kids to see if they do anything wrong and telling them off if they do, if they do something wrong, of course the adult will see. But if you think of it as a teacher with a classroom of 30 kids it's easy to do the wrong thing while the teacher isn't looking. Gun bans won't stop bad people getting guns, there are plenty of illegal ways to get them, aside from making your own, which would be almost impossible in a mess of 300 million people to stop.
Max.Wallace says2015-08-03T02:31:39.4082328Z
Send a memo to the commies and dems, socialists and progressives, the populace says no!
CJW2209 says2015-08-03T06:55:12.4512106Z
Honestly, the 'NO' people need help. I'm not some crazy liberal nut like you probably call everyone who wants gun control but do you seriously dispute that gun control would reduce crime? Less guns = Less murders, Less guns = Less Robberies and Burglaries, Less Guns = Less Gang Crime. To suggest gun control would not reduce crime is completely deluded. Look at the the world's countries with Gun Control and then compare them with crime rates in the US and this will answer this poll...
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-03T18:48:19.8196584Z
CJW - If you want to try and put emphasis on crime reduction you should know that murder is one of the smallest slivers in the crime pie. Whatever reduction you think it might have is going to be minimal at best and not worth our time or restriction to freedom.
Aaryan_Batra says2015-08-04T03:50:06.2549240Z
There is two ways to this 1. History will repeat itself such as the war on drugs when the government banned drugs and put people in jail for having them leading them to do crime because they had gone to jail before thus giving them no opportunity to get a job - same thing might happen with guns - people put in jail, people get released - they cant get jobs - more crime 2. Australia has a mass murder in the 90s with guns so they banned guns and guess what Australia's crime rate plummeted
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-04T10:38:06.6542128Z
So on that note something to look at then might be 'Have arrests for gun possession gone up since the ban?' since that would be the intermediary step before those guys got out of jail and began committing other crime instead.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-04T10:38:50.6464948Z
Intermediate step*
karunadas says2015-08-04T12:22:52.7613081Z
When reduces the availability of weapons , the percentage of crime also reduces .
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-04T13:14:04.7549440Z
When instituting a ban on anything ... Crime goes up because everyone that was using that thing beforehand is now a criminal. Check out how that worked with alcohol, or even how it's working right now with other narcotics. Yet you complain that we jail to many based on those crimes ...
biggest_pro_going says2015-08-21T16:57:53.5852001Z
All this poll shows is this site has lots of patriotic Americans
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-21T18:32:36.8184622Z
2/3rds.
tajshar2k says2015-08-21T18:39:31.6980171Z
@biggest_pro_going so?
Khaos_Mage says2015-09-11T20:18:51.8950968Z
This is a test post.
TBR says2015-09-11T20:26:55.2266896Z
Test received and confirmed.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-14T15:37:25.5628041Z
Ping ... Pong ...
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-09-14T15:38:22.6602681Z
Ping ... Pong ...
francesM says2015-09-15T14:58:00.2480107Z
Any tool can do harm, it is the intent behind the tool that is the real issue.
reece says2015-09-18T06:43:36.4762715Z
@francesM The more powerful a weapon is, the more damage it does.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-10-14T13:08:53.1261916Z
So would you feel safer if everyone was armed with the internet? Or if only a select few (like our policemen and government) were armed with it?
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-10-14T13:09:27.5092528Z
So would you feel safer if everyone was armed with the internet? Or if only a select few (like our policemen and government) were armed with it?
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-10-14T13:14:08.5174567Z
Because, I mean, comparatively you people have no idea how to use the internet the way a CIA/FBI/NSA agent does. Your gross misuse of it is pretty dangerous. Like an untrained person with mental issues having access to firearms.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-10-14T13:18:35.9221990Z
Would the majority of hurt you people cause others on FB and others with your comments from the peanut gallery go down if we instituted an all out internet ban on you people? Would those crimes be reduced? No, because regardless of what level of access you have to the internet, youre still going to be inclined to hurt people. You just wont be able to do it on the scale of a person with an automatic weapon.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-10-14T13:19:44.0643094Z
... Or a nuke for that matter.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-10-14T13:20:36.4345165Z
... Or a nuke for that matter.
Vox_Veritas says2015-10-20T01:02:28.4113424Z
Wut is this? Posts from 2013?
Vox_Veritas says2015-10-20T01:06:55.8160847Z
Wut is this? Posts from 2013?
DerKurbis says2015-10-20T18:28:33.2259446Z
Banning guns will not do anything. People will find other weapons to use for wrongdoing.
DerKurbis says2015-10-20T18:31:22.0948621Z
Banning guns will not do anything. People will find other weapons to use for wrongdoing.
Pigzooka says2015-10-23T16:55:13.1042931Z
I believe guns would be confiscated before they were made illegal.
Ethan14 says2015-10-23T18:09:56.6715521Z
I'm not sure this would fall under the "News" category. And this should be an opinion too. A face off would probably be better.
Max.Wallace says2015-10-24T00:29:36.2353297Z
There are at least 5 times as many guns as the propagandists report. There are so many guns in this union, that you gun snatchers are unaware of, you will each have to house at least 10 man made criminals. Is there room in your Ivory tower backyard guesthouse, rich fool?
Proguns says2015-10-24T15:00:20.3326922Z
As a voter I am reaching out to you today to urge you to stand up in defense of our Second Amendment Rights. There is no “common sense” to the gun ban agenda. There are no solutions being put forth that would have made a difference in the tragedies the gun ban lobby seeks to exploit. With record gun sales still occurring, crime rates continue to fall to historic lows, despite the media’s obsessive focus on the criminals that have always existed but now know they can become twisted cultural icons through the modern 24/7 news cycle. Please stand strong in defense of our Second Amendment Rights in Washington
Dpowell says2015-10-26T14:40:59.4527199Z
Banning guns will most likely increase the crime rate. This is because people will no longer have a way to defend themselves during an armed robbery, so more stores will be robbed. This may also damage the economy, seeing how as American's we love our guns and I'm assuming a large portion of our economy comes from the sale of guns. Also, who knows how much money people will take when they rob the stores, banks, etc.
Pigzooka says2015-10-26T17:37:45.5974803Z
People seem to believe that banning guns is impossible because it makes everyone who owns a gun a criminal. Why? As with any gun ban, the guns would of course be confiscated before they were made illegal. Look at the UK, where murder rates are far lower. People talk about car accidents and abortions. Abortions are not murder, and car accidents aren't fully preventable (though definitely reducible) because cars are a necessary part of daily life. Large guns are the security blankets of senile Teanderthals who believe that the world is out to get them and they need to weaponize while they still can, even though the average gun shoots a family member 99 times for every 1 time it shoots a burglar/home invader.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-10-26T18:58:02.2369062Z
"who believe that the world is out to get them and they need to weaponize while they still can" And your stance on peoples right to possess inanimate objects is proof of that.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-10-26T18:58:37.6963881Z
"who believe that the world is out to get them and they need to weaponize while they still can" And your stance on peoples right to possess inanimate objects is proof of that.
Figeon says2015-10-27T04:28:29.3485876Z
At the very least it would reduce the amount of homicides. Sure, "they could use other weapons" but it's a lot more easy and mindless just to pull a trigger than to stab someone for example.
Bob13 says2015-10-29T16:31:05.4382421Z
@Pigzooka Since when did the UK have a low crime rate? Where is your source? How is abortion not murder? Why are cars a necessary part of life when guns are not? Your entire argument is a series of unproven assumptions.
CaptainMorkunas says2015-10-29T20:56:40.1234795Z
If you want peace, prepare for war.
SweetDiscord says2015-10-30T20:53:00.7760391Z
According to the report, while background checks for firearm purchasers hit record levels in 2013 — 21,093,273 to be exact — “violent crimes in 2013 decreased 4.4 percent when compared with 2012 figures, and the estimated number of property crimes decreased 4.1 percent.” (source: http://www.ijreview.com/2014/11/200671-fbi-now-know-record-numbers-gun-sales-means-gun-crimes-america/) The above quote shows the complexity. We do not have a direct correlation between guns and violence. Violence is a part of the human condition. A gun is a tool you can use to express violence. They have zero impact on my desire to hurt others. In short, "Where there is a will, there is a way."
chlln says2015-10-31T22:49:38.4853129Z
Yes! Lets ban drugs too! It will lower drug usage! Not just put all the illegal drugs in the hands of criminals!!! Oh wait... The war on guns would be as winnable as a war on drugs, it would just take responsible peoples guns away and prevent them from protecting themselves, criminals buying illegal guns(used in 90% of gun crimes) would not care about them being illegal their guns are already illegal! Stupidest idea i have heard in a long time
CJames says2015-11-03T19:30:56.6740077Z
Banning guns did nothing for Australia, or the UK in terms of violent crime, or even in terms of murder, so there is no rational reason to believe it will have a positive effect here.
TrumpetTrain says2015-11-03T21:50:23.1929484Z
Without a doubt. In 2013, where keep in mind, you can get a gun as easily as a toy from Toys R Us, we had about 11,000 gun deaths. We have a population of about 300 Million. In Canada, where they have a population of 35 Million People, it's quite tougher to get a gun, but you can still purchase them. In Canada, a 2013 study showed that they only had 131 homicides. They have a tenth of our population, but that's INSANE! They had like, 1.2% of our gun deaths.
RamishSaqib says2015-11-04T21:24:00.8378603Z
Oh please tell me more about how criminals follow laws (sarcastic tone)
TBR says2015-11-04T21:27:00.7671069Z
@RamishSaqib - Do you think there is no "first crime" for a criminal?
BlackFlags says2015-11-04T21:28:53.9185750Z
If gun control reduced gun based crimes by 10 times, I still would not support gun control
RamishSaqib says2015-11-05T00:52:10.1940557Z
@TBR why would a criminal obey the law if they have the mentality to commit the crime in the first place?
Max.Wallace says2015-11-05T00:55:21.5629358Z
All we need to do is look at the places in the US where guns have the tightest controls, and see that the murder rates are the highest there. The proof is in the pudding. Want more crime? Make things illegal, you Eurosheeple.
RamishSaqib says2015-11-05T00:55:27.2414450Z
@TBR what I mean is like if the person wants to shoot someone, what will banning guns do. It was already illegal in the first place. Will it become double illegal, they won't care. E.G (Someone plans to bomb someplace, they ban bombs, won't they still bomb?
tajshar2k says2015-11-05T00:58:01.5523475Z
That's true for the most part, but the thing is some people won't commit crimes when they know it's illegal. Most people torrent music and stuff because they know they won't get caught. Say the government attempted to crack down on every torrenter, less people will do it.
TBR says2015-11-05T01:01:16.0051010Z
@RamishSaqib - If you were to become a criminal, you have the ability to purchase a gun while you have not been convicted of a crime. That is the point.
tajshar2k says2015-11-05T01:05:08.1186155Z
@TBR But that's why we need background checks, not gun bans. Sure they would serve the same purpose, but the gun ban brings in a lot of downsides. Which is what I think Ramish is trying to say. Keep law abiding guys from getting guns, criminals will have a hell of a time doing what they do best.
tajshar2k says2015-11-05T01:06:56.5563008Z
93% of gun crime is committed by illegal guns. I have sources for that if you want them.
tajshar2k says2015-11-05T01:11:30.5599700Z
And it is not from the NRA or some gun lobby group.
TBR says2015-11-05T01:22:26.7709892Z
No. The point I am making is much more basic. There are certainly people who commit crime with guns that they have purchased legally, the percentage is not important, its just the point that you are not "born criminal" right? At some point legal life can become the illegal life.
tajshar2k says2015-11-05T01:30:51.8619023Z
That is true, but it is more logical to focus the larger %, because that is where most of the crime is coming from. Sure people might own a gun, and turn a criminal 3 years from that point, but that isn't the case most of the time. Most of the time, people get their guns from illegal dealers or steal them. When legal gun owners can't protect themselves, then criminals will still have guns regardless. The amount of people who buy a legal gun and become criminals is much lower than the amount of criminals who just get their guns from illegal sources.
TBR says2015-11-05T01:35:10.4056742Z
I am not disagreeing with the percentages. Truthfully, to me, the fact that criminals have guns is secondary to any issue I have with guns at all.
LePiPPiN says2015-11-05T17:31:13.1394689Z
People seem to blame the guns for the root of the problem, but what really matters is the mental state of the individual. Everybody goes to the doctor one time or another, and usually notices they have some mental problem. Even if guns were banned, other objects considered weapons, knives and a sort, would then be used, leading to a more gruesome scene if you think about it. Yes other weapons are still being used, but guns are so intertwined into the human culture as a whole that you can't just simply ban them. In my opinion people have the right to own a gun, to a certain point. Going back to the mental state of a person, if a person has a certain mental problem, say some sort of major depression or anger issue, they should be LIMITED on the guns that they can have. I say limited because then we would have an uproar of people saying that we are taking away the right of guns, yes I do realize that they still have guns, but issuing some less effective guns (sorry I'm not a gunsmith), like a 22 or something, would please both sides of the wall in a way. People get guns, even though it may not be what you want, and you don't take a right completely away.
RamishSaqib says2015-11-09T20:48:49.1377879Z
Yeah LePippin knows what they're talking about. To reiterate, making guns illegal won't do much if the person's mentality is messed up. They'll kill with, or without guns. Most gun crimes happen in gun free zones, explain that to me? Guns are just a way to commit the crime. At this point you'll have to ban anything that can be used as a weapon and by the way, good luck trying to ban scissors.
RamishSaqib says2015-11-09T20:50:06.0452949Z
Yeah LePippin knows what they're talking about. To reiterate, making guns illegal won't do much if the person's mentality is messed up. They'll kill with, or without guns. Most gun crimes happen in gun free zones, explain that to me? Guns are just a way to commit the crime. At this point you'll have to ban anything that can be used as a weapon and by the way, good luck trying to ban scissors.
TBR says2015-11-09T20:51:16.7033553Z
@RamishSaqib - Most gun crime happens in gun-free zones? Please...
BlackFlags says2015-11-09T21:07:01.4895856Z
Chicago and New York
TBR says2015-11-09T21:09:34.2282065Z
@BlackFlags - Is that at me, and if so, what are you saying?
BlackFlags says2015-11-09T21:11:18.9723538Z
Attempts to ban guns have not lowered the rate of violent civilian deaths, in times of gun control during both war and peace.
tajshar2k says2015-11-09T21:11:35.8762267Z
HAHA Chicago isn't even in the top 20 dangerous cities.
TBR says2015-11-09T21:13:26.3079188Z
@BlackFlags - I still don't know if that is aimed at me or not. NY and Chicago are NOT "gun free zones".
BlackFlags says2015-11-09T21:13:50.4887516Z
Chicago has a high crime rate and is one of the number one cities in the United States for gang assembly. The city of Chicago has done everything imaginable to try and regulate purchasing of firearms, yet it does not change the fact that the gangs are well armed and equipped.
BlackFlags says2015-11-09T21:15:15.7939595Z
It is almost never the main city either. It is always the cities found in the same metropolitan area. You will be fine going to Detroit, but watch out in the cities edging Detroit. Same with Chicago.
BlackFlags says2015-11-09T21:17:15.5783864Z
Gun free zones do not exist in the US to my knowledge, unless you are referring to a courthouse, government building, or private residential area. Chicago and New York have definitely taken gun control measures to the extreme.
TBR says2015-11-09T21:17:20.8650575Z
BlackFlags - No, no it really isn't. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_crime_rate_(2014) this is a common line of bu11shit.
BlackFlags says2015-11-09T21:18:30.5118809Z
Look at China. They have a dozen mass stabbings and a dozen public bombings a year. Goes to show that you do not need firearms to kill people en'masse.
BlackFlags says2015-11-09T21:21:10.2801446Z
Chicago was in the top 25 cities for violent crime in America according to your wikipedia list mate
TBR says2015-11-09T21:21:23.1500621Z
"They have a dozen mass stabbings and a dozen public bombings a year. " out of 1.3b people, and "dozens" while we have somewhere between 50-75 / year. Our gun culture is a mess.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-11-18T13:35:43.7404563Z
I still think 50-75 a year out of 300M+ people is nothing to be worried about either, really.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-11-18T13:36:24.3313961Z
I still think 50-75 a year out of 300M+ people is nothing to be worried about either, really.
RamishSaqib says2015-11-29T01:31:09.5483786Z
All I'm saying is that the whole law would be impossible to enforce. Think back to Prohibition
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-11-30T04:21:36.6925461Z
Making assault rifles aint exactly as easy as making shine though. But no, they wouldn't be able to stop it. Not given all the other liberties we have to work with to get around it. Maybe in a place like Korea or Australia or something ... But not here.
Anonymous24601 says2015-12-02T14:14:43.7639202Z
Guns don't kill people, people kill people.
whatshouldIdo says2015-12-13T00:21:27.7682284Z
Whatever I stated in the comment, I did not mean to copy anybody. I didn't read the other comments.
notbrent says2015-12-23T18:00:03.6915472Z
It would not reduce crime due to the fact that people would start selling guns illegally and it would increase the amount of gang crime
Tallgun says2016-01-13T02:01:55.6813028Z
Look at the UK handgun ban, ever since then stabbings have been through the roof so much that they have a new movement call "Save a life, Surrender your knife" NOT EVEN KIDDING
TrumpetTrain says2016-02-28T00:02:39.7008344Z
Alright, here's the deal: I'm an Independent, so this is tough for me, but my opinion is complicated. Right now, the amount of defense with guns is low. According to, "ThinkProcess.Org," As noted by VPC, the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) observed a similar trend in previous years. Between 2007 and 2011, 29,618,300 people experienced a violent crime, but only 235,700 — 0.8 percent — of victims used or threatened to use a gun in self-defense. Findings from both the VPC and NCVS supplement studies verifying that more guns lead to more crimes." Now, you can't deny getting a gun is easy in the US. So, here's what we do: 1: We start background checks. If that doesn't work... 2: We ban assault rifles. If that doesn't work... 3: We ban EVERY gun. If THAT doesn't work... 4: We evaluate when we had the least gun violence, and use those laws. For example, if we had the LEAST gun violence during Step 1, we go back to that, and keep it that way. And we have no way to make guns easier to access, and more in favor of the Right, because if we Armed EVERYONE, we're going DOWNHILL. The Constitution was Amendable because the Founding Fathers knew it wasn't perfect, and the 2nd Amendment goes along with it. Now, if throughout the steps crime gets even WORSE, we go back to square 1, and just try to ban illegal gun selling, THEN use background checks.
LibLove says2016-03-31T05:43:09.4965880Z
Just as you need a knife to stab someone, you need a gun to shoot someone. Guns are tools made to destroy, maim, and kill. There are better ways to protect each other instead of relying on citizens to be 'the good guy with the gun.'
bigdave says2016-03-31T22:04:24.5108322Z
It hasn't happened anywhere yet.
hcoleman98 says2016-03-31T23:28:04.2306762Z
Gun control alone is not going to solve the obvious problem we have with gun violence in America. Its a begining and better than sitting there and doing nothing while men, women and children are dying. America has an unhealthy relationship with its firearms and its time we start adjusting our mindset while putting the proper restrictions in to place.
hcoleman98 says2016-03-31T23:29:48.7058853Z
Gun control alone is not going to solve the obvious problem we have with gun violence in America. Into a beginning, and better than sitting there and doing nothing while men, women, and children are dying. America has an unhealthy relationship with its firearms and its time we start adjusting our mindset while putting the proper restrictions in to place.
Dpowell says2016-04-01T16:51:09.9545382Z
@yay842. If you look at the statistics, every country (especially Great Britain) that has banned guns, has seen an extreme increase in crime. This would not be the case for us though, because we'd go into an all out Civil War because "banning guns" would be taking away our second amendment. That amendment exists to support our right to overthrow the government if we, the people, deem it to be too tyrannical. Now. To all those who said yes to this. Are you really willing to give up your second amendment? This would make it easier for the government to do anything and get away with it. Also, everyone would turn to crime if guns were to be banned because they would still be sold on the black market. I know for a fact, a lot of law abiding citizens love their guns, and we'll get them anyway we can. I'd also like to point out, that places with little to no gun laws, are usually safer and have less incidents than places with more and stricter gun laws.
Dpowell says2016-04-01T16:58:46.8561246Z
I also forgot to mention that our founding fathers said specifically that anyone who would take our guns is an enemy to this country. And I see 134 traitors here and 279 patriots. I applaud you fellow patriots. If you only voted yes because you know what will really happen if we ban guns, I still applaud you, for being educated.
Dpowell says2016-04-01T17:01:24.5512728Z
I also forgot to mention that our founding fathers said specifically that anyone who would take our guns is an enemy to this country. And I see 134 traitors here and 279 patriots. I applaud you fellow patriots. If you only voted yes because you know what will really happen if we ban guns, I still applaud you, for being educated.
Dpowell says2016-04-01T17:02:29.7908910Z
I also forgot to mention that our founding fathers said specifically that anyone who would take our guns is an enemy to this country. And I see 134 traitors here and 279 patriots. I applaud you fellow patriots. If you only voted yes because you know what will really happen if we ban guns, I still applaud you, for being educated.
Dpowell says2016-04-01T17:07:19.9059507Z
I also forgot to mention that our founding fathers said specifically that anyone who would take our guns is an enemy to this country. And I see 134 traitors here and 279 patriots. I applaud you fellow patriots. If you only voted yes because you know what will really happen if we ban guns, I still applaud you, for being educated.
paypaypay says2016-04-03T12:02:33.8602085Z
Living in Australia, we have not had any gun or mass shooting sprees for nearly 20 years after they were banned.
Max.Wallace says2016-04-06T00:08:12.5307310Z
Banning hateful religions would help far more people.
Max.Wallace says2016-04-06T00:09:13.1378965Z
Banning hateful religions would help far more people.
Max.Wallace says2016-04-06T00:10:13.1834512Z
Banning hateful religions would help far more people. Der the pany waist commie censors won't allow this comment, they are retards.
xus00HAY says2016-04-06T03:32:18.0099950Z
The majority of people who get shot in the USA are criminals.
xus00HAY says2016-04-06T03:35:55.7717909Z
Guns are associated so much with American history, that if you don't like guns, you don't like America. Why don't you move to someplace where they have strict gun control?
Wolf_Keiko says2016-04-06T20:07:11.6813871Z
Guns aren't that hard to find. Banning them would just mean that all businesses could not sell guns in the U.S. But what about outside of the U.S.? And anyways a lot of people wouldn't just give up the guns that they already have. Plus their is also Hammers, Chainsaws, Bats, And Knives.
steven8 says2016-04-24T06:58:30.3203538Z
Liberal logic never works. Ban the object instead of healing the culture. But instead the media and politicians love to antagonize and divide the culture. Why hold individuals responsible for what they do when you can distract everyone and make them focus on a inanimate object and tell them that this is what causes all the violence and murder instead of holding people responsible. The liberals never have a problem hold police officers responsible when they use brutality or fire their weapons but when ever a mass shooting the media and even our own president without missing a heartbeat blames the gun instead of the shooter.
Dpowell says2016-04-25T14:15:22.6091385Z
To everyone who said yes. You guys obviously don't look into Great Britain much. After they banned guns in the UK, guess what. The crime rate went up. It practically doubled, and as far as anyone's concerned, it's not going to be coming back down.
Dpowell says2016-04-25T14:17:43.1192392Z
To everyone who said yes. You guys obviously don't look into Great Britain much. After they banned guns in the UK, guess what. The crime rate went up. It practically doubled, and as far as anyone's concerned, it's not going to be coming back down.
Dpowell says2016-08-22T21:04:33.9813684Z
@paypaypay That's what you think. What about all the mass shootings that the media is most likely keeping quiet. All over the world, the governments control all media. There could be a mass shooting in the town right next to yours, and the only one's who would know would be the people in that town. But if you really haven't had any mass shootings, that doesn't mean the crime rate has gone down. There are still other weapons people can use. @foxxhajti Have you ever tried to buy a gun here in the states? It's not as easy as you think.
BUILDTHEWALL says2017-09-08T05:31:14.7248385Z
An ARMED society is a POLITE society.
Vaarka says2017-09-24T18:39:25.5585065Z
Isn't this almost 4 years old? Lol
leka443 says2017-09-27T17:43:24.5364107Z
There is no way a ban would reduce crime in the U.S
leka443 says2017-09-28T12:08:55.7953056Z
There is no way a ban would reduce crime in the U.S
RussellDebates101 says2017-10-06T14:57:52.3303262Z
Honestly, if we ban guns and took them away from legal gun owners, we are basically giving criminals an advantage because we took guns away from legal gun owners and didn't take them from illegal gun owners, which then equals no personal defense against a criminal.
RussellDebates101 says2017-10-06T16:36:05.7426818Z
Honestly, if we ban guns and took them away from legal gun owners, we are basically giving criminals an advantage because we took guns away from legal gun owners and didn't take them from illegal gun owners, which then equals no personal defense against a criminal.
anondebate says2017-10-08T22:01:12.0582563Z
To everyone saying criminals don't pay attention to laws so this wouldn't effect them: making it harder to obtain a gun is not a bad thing. I think that to prevent mass shootings, guns should be harder to purchase and people have to go through a mental screening beforehand that is very in-depth. Most guns used in mass shootings are legally obtained.
berzerk says2017-10-09T12:11:51.2972286Z
Although it will take time, they must ban it! Better late than never however they must also ensure to implement laws to for citizens to surrender weapons. However, sadly not all weapons will be surrendered but at least certain honest humans might :|
WhiteWolfBlackMoon says2017-10-10T01:25:54.6623398Z
Does anyone else realize that all the bad people just do the opposite of what the law says? The law says "Dont kill nobody" or "don't rob anybody" But do people still do that? Yes they do. If the says that guns are banned tey will just get out there guns and goo kill all of new your city. GUNS SHOULD NOT BE BANNED!
ladiesman says2017-10-10T01:44:02.4491639Z
Guns are only part of the problem of mass shootings. The other components are our pop culture and mental health. Previous mass murderers such as Seung-Hui Cho (Virginia Tech), Robert Hawkins (Westroads Mall), Adam Lanza (Sandy Hook) and Jennifer San Marco (Goleta postal facility shootings) were severely mentally unstable and did not receive the proper treatment. We need to be more vigilant about whom we sell weapons to. Mental instability and guns are a bad combination. And violence is interwoven into our country's pop culture. Video games such as Grand Theft Auto and Halo desensitize viewers.
ladiesman says2017-10-10T01:45:24.5218161Z
Guns are only part of the problem of mass shootings. The other components are our pop culture and mental health. Previous mass murderers such as Seung-Hui Cho (Virginia Tech), Robert Hawkins (Westroads Mall), Adam Lanza (Sandy Hook) and Jennifer San Marco (Goleta postal facility shootings) were severely mentally unstable and did not receive the proper treatment. We need to be more vigilant about whom we sell weapons to. Mental instability and guns are a bad combination. And violence is interwoven into our country's pop culture. Video games such as Grand Theft Auto and Halo desensitize viewers.
ladiesman says2017-10-10T01:54:51.9634909Z
And another thing; with Adam Lanza his mother should have been more vigilant. It was obvious that he had serious mental problems and she owned so many guns. She should have known better than to let him have simple access to them. If you own a firearm(s) and you have kids, separate the gun from the ammunition and keep them locked up in a secret location. The same thing with Robert Hawkins; he used his stepfather's assault rifle that was being kept in a closet and was not separated from the ammunition.
ladiesman says2017-10-10T01:57:00.5715397Z
And another thing; with Adam Lanza his mother should have been more vigilant. It was obvious that he had serious mental problems and she owned so many guns. She should have known better than to let him have simple access to them. If you own a firearm(s) and you have kids, separate the gun from the ammunition and keep them locked up in a secret location. The same thing with Robert Hawkins; he used his stepfather's assault rifle that was being kept in a closet and was not separated from the ammunition.
WhiteWolfBlackMoon says2017-10-10T02:04:46.2844860Z
Look here ladiesman I get what you are trying to say. But I am 15 and have been shooting guns since i was like 2. I havent killed nobody. Gunsmen can sell guns to whom ever they want. You can just get a full on backround chech to sell some one a little bb gun . Can they? No.
ladiesman says2017-10-10T03:33:01.3952288Z
@WhiteWolfBlackMoon What are you saying?
Pepperoni_Secret says2017-10-10T16:10:37.7282237Z
Nope
WhiteWolfBlackMoon says2017-10-10T16:19:26.7421440Z
I dont even know.
ladiesman says2017-10-10T22:51:21.6300749Z
I don't know if there is a law against this, but if not, they ought to prohibit people with a history of mental illness from buying guns. Seung-Hui Cho and Jennifer San Marco were able to purchase guns despite their history of mental instability. Another step politics ought to take is abolishing the gun show loophole, no seller should be exempt from background checks.
Debating_Horse says2017-10-10T22:53:59.9718945Z
Bannig guns does not do anything to stop crime. Crime can be committed with and without guns, explosives, vehicles, or melee weapons can be used to carry out crimes.
Debating_Horse says2017-10-10T22:57:02.2434629Z
Typing without making revisions had lead to me publishing my comment with the error in spelling "banning".
WhiteWolfBlackMoon says2017-10-11T01:22:59.4111735Z
Wait..... I have been known to have occasional blackouts..... Does that mean I wouldn't be able to buy a gun?
carterW says2017-10-11T14:56:57.0793513Z
I think we are in a pickle
kronixx says2017-10-12T12:53:07.5256926Z
Banning guns won't reduce crime, it will just make it harder to get guns, because you'd have to import them from Canada or Mexico.
subdeo says2017-11-07T20:50:22.5940737Z
WHO!!! Keeps putting this poll on the front page!!!! STOP IT!
GeneralTroubles says2017-11-07T22:35:12.7103947Z
The man who recently shot up that church was an escaped mental patient. Banning guns won't stop anything, due to a new illegal market to now meet the demand. At that point, if you own a property and someone with an assault gun decides to rob you, you have only a dinky pistol to fight back. Your body will be found the next week if you're lucky. If anything, we need to restore sanitariums and places for the mentally ill to reside away from society. That's not unfair treatment, it's a fact that these people are dangerous to themselves and others. And also, the 2nd Amendment was never intended to give guns to rednecks, but rather to fight Tyranny and oppression. And if you think that Tyranny couldn't exist anymore, especially not in the United States? Europe thought the same in the 1930's, and the end results were millions dead. I would say that it is the strongest human right we have, because it allows us to fight back in case our other rights were lost. I find the sudden push by the left to ban guns very disturbing.
GeneralTroubles says2017-11-07T22:36:06.1095370Z
The man who recently shot up that church was an escaped mental patient. Banning guns won't stop anything, due to a new illegal market to now meet the demand. At that point, if you own a property and someone with an assault gun decides to rob you, you have only a dinky pistol to fight back. Your body will be found the next week if you're lucky. If anything, we need to restore sanitariums and places for the mentally ill to reside away from society. That's not unfair treatment, it's a fact that these people are dangerous to themselves and others. And also, the 2nd Amendment was never intended to give guns to rednecks, but rather to fight Tyranny and oppression. And if you think that Tyranny couldn't exist anymore, especially not in the United States? Europe thought the same in the 1930's, and the end results were millions dead. I would say that it is the strongest human right we have, because it allows us to fight back in case our other rights were lost. I find the sudden push by the left to ban guns very disturbing.
HypocriticalDiscussion says2017-11-07T23:02:48.2554071Z
Prohibition does not and has never worked. Look at the drug wars, look at the actual prohibition of alcohol.
Oscar7 says2017-11-08T18:39:30.0803800Z
İt will just increase the unlegitimate gun smuggling
Oscar7 says2017-11-08T18:41:15.5526561Z
İt will just increase the unlegitimate gun smuggling
Quadrunner says2017-11-08T18:59:02.4647917Z
Prohibition always increases crime in the United States, first by criminalizing the culture of a particularly independent people, instantly adding untold amounts stress and criminal offenses with the stroke of a pen, and secondly the nature of black markets, inequality, and social strife. Putting firearms underground is among the most asinine thing I've ever heard on the North American continent. Contrast southern Canada with Mexico, New Hampshire with Mississippi with California....Changing the framework of society does effect culture, but why do we pretend that some arbitrary notion will erase the problems within that culture? When we say drugs are the problem, guns are the problem, alcohol is the problem, etc... Its ascribing a magical property to an object that does not exist. Its only magical because you aren't understanding the underlying principles, and the magician said the hat was magic. What is it about the mason Dixon line? Clearly drugs are causing the opiod epidemic, not the culture behind it, and clearly guns are causing higher rates of homicide. At what point do we admit we, the people, have a problem? When will we get to the point where we look at the streets, not to blame some object, but for what they are, failing communities comprised of people...
Quadrunner says2017-11-08T19:01:36.8579917Z
Prohibition always increases crime in the United States, first by criminalizing the culture of a particularly independent people, instantly adding untold amounts stress and criminal offenses with the stroke of a pen, and secondly the nature of black markets, inequality, and social strife. Putting firearms underground is among the most asinine thing I've ever heard on the North American continent. Contrast southern Canada with Mexico, New Hampshire with Mississippi with California....Changing the framework of society does effect culture, but why do we pretend that some arbitrary notion will erase the problems within that culture? When we say drugs are the problem, guns are the problem, alcohol is the problem, etc... Its ascribing a magical property to an object that does not exist. Its only magical because you aren't understanding the underlying principles, and the magician said the hat was magic. What is it about the mason Dixon line? Clearly drugs are causing the opiod epidemic, not the culture behind it, and clearly guns are causing higher rates of homicide. At what point do we admit we, the people, have a problem? When will we get to the point where we look at the streets, not to blame some object, but for what they are, failing communities comprised of people...
Quadrunner says2017-11-08T19:02:54.0779917Z
Prohibition always increases crime in the United States, first by criminalizing the culture of a particularly independent people, instantly adding untold amounts stress and criminal offenses with the stroke of a pen, and secondly the nature of black markets, inequality, and social strife. Putting firearms underground is among the most asinine thing I've ever heard on the North American continent. Contrast southern Canada with Mexico, New Hampshire with Mississippi with California....Changing the framework of society does effect culture, but why do we pretend that some arbitrary notion will erase the problems within that culture? When we say drugs are the problem, guns are the problem, alcohol is the problem, etc... Its ascribing a magical property to an object that does not exist. Its only magical because you aren't understanding the underlying principles, and the magician said the hat was magic. What is it about the mason Dixon line? Clearly drugs are causing the opiod epidemic, not the culture behind it, and clearly guns are causing higher rates of homicide. At what point do we admit we, the people, have a problem? When will we get to the point where we look at the streets, not to blame some object, but for what they are, failing communities comprised of people...
Quadrunner says2017-11-08T19:13:10.2174679Z
Prohibition always increases crime in the United States, first by criminalizing the culture of a particularly independent people, instantly adding untold amounts stress and criminal offenses with the stroke of a pen, and secondly the nature of black markets, inequality, and social strife. Putting firearms underground is among the most asinine thing I've ever heard on the North American continent. Contrast southern Canada with Mexico, New Hampshire with Mississippi with California....Changing the framework of society does effect culture, but why do we pretend that some arbitrary notion will erase the problems within that culture? When we say drugs are the problem, guns are the problem, alcohol is the problem, etc... Its ascribing a magical property to an object that does not exist. Its only magical because you aren't understanding the underlying principles, and the magician said the hat was magic. What is it about the mason Dixon line? Clearly drugs are causing the opiod epidemic, not the culture behind it, and clearly guns are causing higher rates of homicide. At what point do we admit we, the people, have a problem? When will we get to the point where we look at the streets, not to blame some object, but for what they are, failing communities comprised of people...
JewBoi says2017-11-08T19:19:43.0591861Z
Then only criminals would have guns
Historybuff01 says2017-11-09T00:15:39.5454090Z
Even if guns are banned, that will not stop people from doing bad things. And if one was to bring up the subject of terror attacks, banned guns would not do anything to hinder their destructive rampages. They can use many things that are not guns, such as cars and pressure cookers to send their terror into the hearts of millions.
Historybuff01 says2017-11-09T00:16:52.4290762Z
Even if guns are banned, that will not stop people from doing bad things. And if one was to bring up the subject of terror attacks, banned guns would not do anything to hinder their destructive rampages. They can use many things that are not guns, such as cars and pressure cookers to send their terror into the hearts of millions.
Beefest says2017-11-09T22:45:23.2018855Z
FBI 2015 Report, 548 people killed by rifles and shotguns combined 1573 people were hacked to death 670 people killed by fists and feet Though handgun related deaths are much higher, the study doesn't take accidents into effect. Also note only around 3% of gun deaths are actually committed using legally purchased guns. Though guns deaths may be high depending on the statistic that you look at, the actually use of legally purchased firearms is drastically smaller. So no, banning guns won't decrease crime rates. Criminals will just get guns how the currently do, illegally, or they will resort to hacking unarmed citizens to death with a hatchet.
GeorgeG says2017-11-10T18:18:51.8350047Z
In my opinion, I believe that there is no point in banning guns or making guns illegal because most crimes committed use previously stolen guns anyways so if you make guns illegal, it doesn't stop gangs from getting their hands on one. Furthermore, if guns were made illegal, the public have a weakened defense system to defend themselves from gang-related crimes and threats.
GeorgeG says2017-11-10T18:19:39.2281085Z
In my opinion, I believe that there is no point in banning guns or making guns illegal because most crimes committed use previously stolen guns anyways, so if you make guns illegal, it doesn't stop gangs from getting their hands on one. Furthermore, if guns were made illegal, the public have a weakened defense system to defend themselves from gang-related crimes and threats.
GeorgeG says2017-11-10T18:20:34.4056622Z
In my opinion, I believe that there is no point in banning guns or making guns illegal because most crimes committed use previously stolen guns anyways, so if you make guns illegal, it doesn't stop gangs from getting their hands on one. Furthermore, if guns were made illegal, the public have a weakened defense system to defend themselves from gang-related crimes and threats.
GeorgeG says2017-11-10T18:22:52.3729466Z
In my opinion, I believe that there is no point in banning guns or making guns illegal because most crimes committed use previously stolen guns anyways, so if you make guns illegal, it doesn't stop gangs from getting their hands on one. Furthermore, if guns were made illegal, the public have a weakened defense system to defend themselves from gang-related crimes and threats.
oceanbacon91 says2017-11-11T17:46:42.5311877Z
Absolutely not. Criminals are called criminals for a reason; they commit crimes. And yes, that includes illegal arms trafficking. If a gun ban is enacted, you're just changing the way people kill each other, not the fact that they do; in addition, the government will be infringing on yet another of our rights as Americans. A gun ban will only take legitimate means of self-defense out of the hands of citizens who need it.
Curlyjason says2017-11-13T16:06:03.6796545Z
If we eliminate guns from the equation than that dose nothing to “bad guys” who already get their guns illegally but it will effect the average citizen who will be defenseless. And even if you could just “erase” guns from egsistance criminal would just find another weapon. Then were back to where we are now.
AlphaTeen says2017-11-13T21:33:19.9272809Z
If you really want to hurt and or kill someone, you will find a way to cause harm to that person. There are more ways to harm someone without a gun than with one. If we really are banning something, don't take one of the amendments, take away the right to be a dumbass. People do some dumbass crap, piss someone else off, and the get killed or hurt by the person(s) affendended by what they said. Also we could not all be pussies and not get butt-hurt over everything that someone else says.
Shad0wXx says2017-11-17T20:38:13.1579766Z
It would likely increase crime, as true criminals would almost certainly be able to get ahold of guns, be it legally or illegally. The law-abiding citizens (without guns, if they were to be banned), would almost certainly be all but defenseless at that point.
Shad0wXx says2017-11-17T20:39:20.0824056Z
It would likely increase crime, as true criminals would almost certainly be able to get ahold of guns, be it legally or illegally. The law-abiding citizens (without guns, if they were to be banned), would almost certainly be all but defenseless at that point.
JoeConner says2017-11-18T20:27:01.8291310Z
The only people who would care that the law had been passed would be law-abiding citizens. Criminals don’t care what the law is.
JoeConner says2017-11-18T20:28:04.6819339Z
The only people who care what the law is are law-abiding citizens. Criminals don’t follow the law.
DareToLearn says2017-11-19T10:32:11.7167770Z
Something has to be done.
wizardic says2017-11-19T18:01:12.3094720Z
Ofc
plasmafish says2017-11-20T04:58:15.9932016Z
The idea of banning guns is illogical in every way. 350 million guns confiscated would take years, and is just the direct doorway to fascism. Gun control could work in small countries like Sweden, Denmark, Canada, etc. For example, let's take a look at Chicago. Chicago is the most democratically plagued gun control area in the US, but yet the chances of you getting killed in Chicago are double the chances of dying in the Afghani war in 2013. Mental health is the real problem, because the essence of the gun control debate is, if you give somebody a gun, someone will die. That is entirely not the case at all. The massive difference will be in if you give a sane person a gun, and an insane person a gun, one person is bound to die, the insane person or the person the insane person is attacking. The Second Amendment secures our rights to own guns, and another argument I hear is "oh those were different times, and different governments". Cause tyrannical governments don't exist anymore?? Hitler had his entire nation's guns stripped, same with Stalin, and the results were millions and millions of people who have died. Guns are our last defense against our government, we should not trust the police with our safety, as we can do anything the police can, but we can do it extremely fast and save people's lives. The idea that "banning guns" will stop crimes is also completely factually absurd, and just plain ignorant propaganda. Criminals will not stop getting guns because the law tells them not to, they're criminals, it's what they do. Has illegalizing drugs stopped drug abusage? No, in truth it's made it much worse and saddening to see. In a perfect world, mass shootings are preventable, but human nature is unpredictable. On another note, guns stop about 2.5 million crimes every day, so 6,000 crimes a day, compared to the 411,000 crimes committed from guns. And the Australian gun control idea is also a logical statement but is factually incorrect. Gun control is not the reason their crime went down, as before the strict gun control there were 1,000,000 guns, but in 2017 they've been replaced by 1,026,000 guns. That is blatant proof that gun control will never work, and that it is a health issue that America has. And Japan is also a prime example, but in Japan, the total murder rate is 1 in 100,000, while in America the murder rate with weapons other than firearms is 3.2 in 100,000. This shows that guns don't kill people, and even if we banned guns, those are not the answer. Sources- http://www.Gunfacts.Info/gun-control-myths/crime-and-guns/#return-note-93-8 http://theredelephants.Com/australia-privately-owned-guns-now-gun-control-enacted/ http://www.Abc.Net.Au/news/2016-04-28/australia-has-more-guns-than-before-port-arthur-massacre/7366360 http://www.Gunfacts.Info/gun-control-myths/guns-in-other-countries/
plasmafish says2017-11-20T04:59:30.6084799Z
The idea of banning guns is illogical in every way. 350 million guns confiscated would take years, and is just the direct doorway to fascism. Gun control could work in small countries like Sweden, Denmark, Canada, etc. For example, let's take a look at Chicago. Chicago is the most democratically plagued gun control area in the US, but yet the chances of you getting killed in Chicago are double the chances of dying in the Afghani war in 2013. Mental health is the real problem, because the essence of the gun control debate is, if you give somebody a gun, someone will die. That is entirely not the case at all. The massive difference will be in if you give a sane person a gun, and an insane person a gun, one person is bound to die, the insane person or the person the insane person is attacking. The Second Amendment secures our rights to own guns, and another argument I hear is "oh those were different times, and different governments". Cause tyrannical governments don't exist anymore?? Hitler had his entire nation's guns stripped, same with Stalin, and the results were millions and millions of people who have died. Guns are our last defense against our government, we should not trust the police with our safety, as we can do anything the police can, but we can do it extremely fast and save people's lives. The idea that "banning guns" will stop crimes is also completely factually absurd, and just plain ignorant propaganda. Criminals will not stop getting guns because the law tells them not to, they're criminals, it's what they do. Has illegalizing drugs stopped drug abusage? No, in truth it's made it much worse and saddening to see. In a perfect world, mass shootings are preventable, but human nature is unpredictable. On another note, guns stop about 2.5 million crimes every day, so 6,000 crimes a day, compared to the 411,000 crimes committed from guns. And the Australian gun control idea is also a logical statement but is factually incorrect. Gun control is not the reason their crime went down, as before the strict gun control there were 1,000,000 guns, but in 2017 they've been replaced by 1,026,000 guns. That is blatant proof that gun control will never work, and that it is a health issue that America has. And Japan is also a prime example, but in Japan, the total murder rate is 1 in 100,000, while in America the murder rate with weapons other than firearms is 3.2 in 100,000. This shows that guns don't kill people, and even if we banned guns, those are not the answer. Sources- http://www.Gunfacts.Info/gun-control-myths/crime-and-guns/#return-note-93-8 http://theredelephants.Com/australia-privately-owned-guns-now-gun-control-enacted/ http://www.Abc.Net.Au/news/2016-04-28/australia-has-more-guns-than-before-port-arthur-massacre/7366360 http://www.Gunfacts.Info/gun-control-myths/guns-in-other-countries/
DonaldLockwood says2017-11-20T14:10:51.8084912Z
I think kids should get the nuts cut if they shoot up a school
DonaldLockwood says2017-11-20T14:12:32.8971392Z
I dont like the jews
aston17lai says2017-11-20T16:59:46.2418551Z
No, it will not reduce crime
aston17lai says2017-11-20T17:00:41.6378102Z
No, it will not reduce crime, because gun can be used as the defender of crime
TheLuapian says2017-11-21T17:33:37.1954548Z
Most guns used in these events are illigally bought, we need more guns in that hands of responsible individuals, so different gun laws, not harsher.
JohnnyMaboy says2017-11-21T23:16:34.9285625Z
There’s already laws against murder, and against brandishing weapons. No amount of taking guns away from law abiding citizens will stop crazy people and criminals. Gang bangers are gonna gang bang, no matter how disarmed the rest of the country is, and mass murderers will find a way. England has strict gun laws, but Manchester still happened. France has strict gun laws but Paris still happened
WhiteHawk says2017-12-01T19:14:51.0495364Z
Banning guns will not reduce anything, it will raise the amount of murder by gun if anything. Criminals can still get guns under the counter and through the black market.
WhiteHawk says2017-12-01T19:17:24.2893187Z
Banning guns will not reduce anything, it will raise the amount of murder by gun if anything. Criminals can still get guns under the counter and through the black market.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.