How do we kill each other if we had no guns. Some may say the ciminals do. Well if there was gun control, no one would have guns. Criminals are us. They are still citizens. I dont get how would we be less safe if there was gun control. Doe you agree????
It reduces crime because most of the time, here in the US, many crimes are committed with guns. Everything starting from school shootings and just shooting incidents happen all because of guns. If there is gun control, towns and communities will be much safer. Banning guns will certainly reduce crime for all of us.
Now, gun control works in Britain and other countries a like because all of the parties involved take on the reason ability of the laws. Of course guns are not completely banned they can still be used for the use of farming and game but there are strict background checks on all gun licences. The problem i feel with trying to introduce tighter gun laws in the US is that each state can have different laws. If you cant get a gun in one state you can go to another and get one there. Having everyone cooperate it will be much harder to have guns and black market for guns will be shrink. Also the less guns available to criminals means the less need for people to have guns for self defence.
The reason why i think it does is because police officers use the firearms for safety purposes and they use their firearms only when shots have been fired. The reason why police officers use firearms is because they use them to defend themselves and to protect the citizens of their states.
Think about it. Do you really need an assault weapon? Remember, when this amendment was made, the only (practical) multi-shot weapon was the blunderbuss, and even though that shot multiple musket balls, it still only had 1 shot. Now we have guns like the MG3, which fires massive 7.62mm x 51mm NATO bullets, at 1,200 to 2,000 RPM (20 to 34 rounds-per-second). And if you think it's going to stop the "government from controlling us", give your facking head a shake! Do you think that a few thousand rebels with budget Assault Rifles, WW2 SMGs, pistols, and rifles is going to stop the most advanced army in the world?!? Just send in 2, maybe 3 LAVs, with some sniper support, and wait about an hour and BOOM, rebellion? What rebellion? All I see is a bunch of dead idiots with guns! Lastly for self defense. I get this one completely. However there are better options. Non-lethal weapons like the tazer (imagine 500 volts of electricity surging through your body, paralyzing you for hours), or pepper spray (being shot in the eyes with civilian-grade pepper spray is like taking 400 jalapeños, and rubbing them all in your eyes at once!). Non lethal weapons FTW. Now shut up and stop complaining, just because you can't own and MP5.
Most people that obtain guns for self defense aren't skilled and ready when they are involved in a real situation. They would most likely be stressed out and nervous which is out of the norm of a calm environment of a shooting range where nobody is in real danger. People with guns often making the situation worse and usually get someone or even themselves killed.
We have the most guns distributed among the general population of probably any civilized first world country and we also have one of the highest rates of death and injury by guns. So we need to enact some gun control laws to make this less of a violent culture that kills.
Gun control reduces the rate of gun crime. Obviously, if there are fewer guns, there will be fewer cases of gun violence. Controlling the number of guns in use and the amount of ammunition in supply will reduce the possibility that these devices can be used. People should not be able to buy guns so easily.
The gun is not the one causing the crimes. It is the holder of the firearm that does the crime. The gun is only a TOOL. Whoever is using this tool controls what it does. A gun does not care who you are, white, black, tall, short, fat, skinny, gay, or lesbian, it will hurt you. But that depends on the user. If someone who obeys the law has a gun and make good decisions the firearm can be used for good. If a criminal has the gun than it can be used to cause harm. Also if we blame guns for gun RELAtTED crimes then we should blame alcohol for car crashes and Mccdonlads for making people fat. THE GUN DOESNT CONTROL WHAT IT DOES. YOU DO.
It makes them go down because batman is scared of fighting criminals with guns... So the justice league has to take on all the bad guys. And that is too much work for 1 team... If i were a super model i would donate my best pair of shoelaces to batman so that he could tie all the bad guys up and take there guns and tie them to their earlobes to scare all the other bad guys into reducing crime
Getting id of guns will just make things worse. People wont be able to defend thee selves so naturally criminals will take advantage. Criminals don't obey laws so they will still get guns, All gun control will do is open the door for criminals to cause a whole lot of pain.
Crime in Britain increased after they banned guns, crime in Chicago decreased after they began allowing concealed carry permits. No the police won't protect you, average response time reports vary but they are at least 5 minutes or more. Police are much more likely to catch the criminals after the crime has been committed than they are to stop the crime in progress. Also before you say we need to ban assault rifles please take a few minutes to understand firearms. Assault rifles are already virtually banned, semi-automatic AR15s are NOT assault rifles. The real problems are the culture of violence, the lack of assistance to those with mental health issues and the increased involvement of the government in raising our children.
Getting rid of guns is a horrible idea. Who in their right mind would wait for cops to show up at their house if some one was breaking in??? But the government is still trying to get guns from the American people. Little by little their doing it. With the "gun registration" and the government buying a lot of the ammunition out there and what ever law that was passed saying that you can have a magazine that can hold more than a certain amount of rounds.... I for one will refuse to register any fire arm i have and i will have a magazine with however many rounds in it i want because i will not let them take away my rights as an American citizen. Come do something about it oboma!!!!!
Criminals do not obey laws, what makes you think that they will abide by this law? If you make guns harder to legally own, you are essentially taking guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens, and putting them into the hand of those who wish to do wrong
We seem to enforce gun control laws at a state level and not a federal level. Which means no matter how strict a state is on guns, people in said state can just go get guns from a state with laws that are pretty laid back. Everyone needs to get on the same page as what kind of gun laws we want. This way, people can't just go out of state and get automatic weapons to bring back to their home state.
More gun control actually increases crime rates in many cases. Law-abiding citizens are unable to acquire firearms, while criminals can still get these weapons at will. Such a conundrum means that gun control weakens the populace and empowers criminals. With that in mind, gun control is usually a bad idea.
I believe increasing gun control measures increases the rate of gun crimes. The problem with gun control and restricting gun ownership is that it only makes the black market bigger. This creates more criminals in society. This happens when you try to prohibit anything that has a large following. There will always be people who want guns and will obtain them in any way possible.
Don't get me wrong some level of gun control is needed however criminals will break any law they can, saying you can only have a clip with X# of rounds is pointless as only people that obey the law will follow it allowing criminals to have an edge. I personally think we don't need more gun control we need smarter gun control.
If you go to somewhere like Detroit or New York City or Washington DC, there is way more gun murders and those cities all have one thing in common: they are statistically some of the highest gun murders cities is the country. Its not a coincidence that those cities have high murder rates and the strictest gun control. Now if you go somewhere where there is very few gun restrictions, there are very few crimes because the law abiding citizens are armed and the criminals do not want to take a larger chance at being shot or killed.
Think about it this way. We outlaw narcotics right? But still they are being used. Much more then they should be. If there was a law that outlawed firearms for civilians, Like the outlaw of narcotics, gangs and criminals would still find ways to get a hold of the outlawed firearms. Making an even more dangerous situation for the citizens of the US. With an average citizen not able to protect himself from a armed criminal, It could be easy manslaughter for this criminal. Outlawing something does not delete it from existence. Just like illegal drugs. Yes Police forces would still have weapons but how long will it take for them to arrive at the seen of a murder. Too long to save a life or lives. Ask yourself this. What if someone came into your house and had a firearm ready to kill you and you have to hide for many minuets waiting for a police officer to come. Chances are you will already be dead. I am sorry for being so gruesome but the problems with gun control must be revealed.