Do guns make us safer: Do guns help improve the safety of society?

  • Hey i lic gun

    Guns will keep people safe .
    Its the persons choice to use the firearm the way they want to.
    Its not the guns fault the owner choose to use it in that way. People are sick to take advantage of something that is really for protection. People are safer to carry guns to protect themselves

  • Aurora theater shooting

    Yeah, ever heard of that. The killer had seven theaters in a 20 mile radius he could have gone. But he did not go to the biggest one, nor the closest one, he went to the one with a no gun sign up. When he went into the theater he was positive he was the only one their

  • Guns dont kill people people kil people

    If a gun kills people than a pencil miss spells words n n n n n n nn n n n nn n n n n n n n nn n n n n n n n n nn n n nn n n nn n n nn n n

  • Guns don't kill people people kill people

    If you put a loaded gun on a table and ask it to kill someone it wont if you give the gun to a person it depends how she / he uses the firearm. If people use it to defend themselves it helps. That us why guns should stay in the America.

  • Statistics from the CDC and DOJ prove that guns owned by responsible, law abiding and menu stable citizens makes us safer.

    The CDCs study found ta guns were used nearly 1 million times a gar to prevent crime. 400,000 of those times the person who prevented the crime believed that if they did not have a gun they would have been killed. Guns save 400,000 people a year in America. As terrible as 30,000 gun deaths we have every year are most of me couldn't be prevents by gun control. 7000 of the 10,000 gun murderers are gang relate. Gangsters taffic all types of stuff illegal so of course they would traffic guns. Than there's suicides witch makes up 20,000 of the 30,000 gun deaths we have each year. Most Suicides could not be preventable by gun control. A good example of how low gun ownership effects crime is that of England. According to the home office England has 2034 violent crime victims per 100,000 people a year compared to Americas 466 violent crimes per 100,000 people a year (fbi)England's violent crime rate is higher than south Africa's!. They also have 125% more rape victims than us. A women is not able to pull out a gun when a group of rapists attack her. In America women have that ability and an estimated 200,000 would be rapes are stopped by guns a year in America. A nother point to make is that England's murderer rate jumped 50% and their crime rate by 70% after their gun ban. It was only in the early 2000s when they got more cops that their crime rates fell.
    Our crime rates have been falling for the last 20 years as gun ownership rises as fbi.Gov shows. Our violent crime has dropped 50%.
    Conclusion-- guns in the hands of responsible, law abiding, mentally stable citizens keep Americans safer.

  • An armed society is a polite one.

    Criminals do not obey gun control laws. If they obeyed law they would not cause crime at all. Tragedies happen in armed countries, but it's a slight percentage. In countries where citizens are generally not allowed to posess guns like USSR, Nazi Germany or Cambodia genocides and opession prevailed. Freedom must be maintainted and not taken for granted.

  • They absolutely do.

    Just look at Switzerland, 1 in 3 people own a gun there and it has one of the lowest crime rates in the world. The reason is because and would be criminal wouldn't dare break into a store or home because everyone in it would pull their guns on him, and its better than the police because by the time the police arrive, they will be sketching the chalk line of your body.

  • They help keep people safe more often than not.

    It is true that there are too many murders in the United States and too many of them are committed with the use of a firearm. “Roughly 16,272 murders were committed in the United States during 2008. Of these, about 10,886 or 67% were committed with firearms (1).” However, compare that to a "nationwide survey of 4,977 households [which] found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone ‘almost certainly would have been killed’ if they ‘had not used a gun for protection.’ Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all ‘military service, police work, or work as a security guard.’(1)” This suggests that its 15 times more likely for a firearm to be used in a defensive situation than be used in a crime. In other words, for every 1 person murdered with a firearm, 15 other people have successfully defended off a life-threatening attack with the aid of a firearm. So from this perspective, do guns have a more positive or negative impact in society? I’m persuaded to think guns have a more positive impact on society, they do at least 15 times more good than bad.


  • Guns make us safer.

    Although many people believe that guns are causing more crime problems, I think they actually can be a benefit to society. The people that own the guns are the ones that are causing the crime, not the guns themselves. I think that owning a gun (with a license and background check) would be a great way to protect yourself should something come up where you would need to use it.

  • Look at the numbers

    Gun violence is a major problem is society, and the argument by those who preach the vague, outdated sentiments of the second amendment are that these crimes are rarely committed by those with legal gun permits. That's true. But what necessity to guns have if not to kill? That they are here in society is a problem enough.

  • Guns are destructive

    Guns; whether used for the purposes of sport i.e. hunting or target shooting is destructive (respectively, killing animals and destroying objects). Its inventive purpose is to destroy. By instilling the illusion amongst society that it is for defensive purposes goes against its objective design. It destroys trust amongst humanity. Instead of upholding the ideologies of a cohesive and harmonious society you are simply encouraging individuals to be sceptical and have distrust towards their fellow neighbors. It doesn't matter if he or she is sane or insane - the moment you meet someone who tells you they have a gun you have already questioned their sanity and trustworthiness. "Divide & Conquer" is an age old idiom that is now becoming 'idiotic' in a world that strives to progress and advance itself beyond civility. By possessing guns for the purpose of "self-defence" you merely suggest to society that you do not trust one another. It is this message of distrust that truly conquers and divides society because we condition ourselves to question each other's legitimacy and capacity in every human condition. It would be utterly simplistic to rely on statistics as a medium to justify possessing guns because statistics are evidently retrospective I.e. data is collected after the fact and hence relying on a restrospective data collection to bring about change for the future is counterintuitive. Not to mention these statistics need to be reported and statistics mean nothing when our environment is so rapidly affected by so many extraneous factors that cannot be causally accounted for with simple percentages that merely suggest "something". The issue of gun control comes from, simply putting this, trying to force order onto the unpredictability of the human condition. Can we ever truly predict the misuse of anything? One that is particularly difficult to do so, which is the use of a firearm? No we cannot because humans are unpredictable because we are so complex in our intellect that we cannot predict each other's behavior. And so, with an object that is designed for harm, it perhaps would be prudent to limit and restrict its availability in our society because, we do not want to create such an impressionable society that believes there are two kinds of people in this world - the 'good' and the 'evil'. Because we all are very capable of both, and all of us are flawed and good. It's just that the consequences of enabling the presence of firearms in society merely encourages the belief that we cannot trust one another. This prohibits humans, as a species and a race to COLLECTIVELY advance into a race that is unified and less likely to have propensity towards delinquency. Trust is earned, we cannot earn this through the prevalence of weapons.

  • People kill people with guns

    When people have access to a gun, it is far easier for them to kill someone than if they don't have access to weapons. Although it is people who kill people, they kill people with guns. In some places it is easier to obtain a gun than food, so these people might use this weapon to their advantage. In conclusion, handguns are bad for society.

  • ,,,,m,mm m m m

    Ljjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj jjj jj j j j j j jjj j j jjjj jj j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j jjjjj j jjj j j j j j j j jjjj j jj

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.