Reports prove that guns cause increased homicides, increased suicides, increased accidents, etc. When compared on a graph to countries with a gun ban you can evidently see that the countries with gun bans have no gun deaths yearly and on the overall less deaths altogether. In places like the US with legal private ownership of firearms the deaths by guns yearly are shocking. This is really an obvious and objective question. The answer is that guns in the US should be banned. I am happy to challenge anybody opposing to my claim.
The US already has a lot of homicides, and with the addition of guns it just makes that place a lot worse. Suicides will increase too because now that people have access to guns, it's easier to kill themselves. Murderers and serial killers have access to guns and can kill a lot of people. How can you trust everyone?
Actually, it is a fact that women and men who carry guns prevent 2 million crimes every year. We use guns as a self defense reflex/action against criminals. The second amendment staes that we have the right to bear arms. People who don't have guns are assaulted or murdered daily by criminals who have guns. Most states issue permits to carry concealed handguns. Men and women who get permits take gun safety classes, and have extensive criminal background checks. These people make everyone a little safer, wherever they may be.
In addition to all the other arguments stated in con, guns have too much of a recreational use to remove them. There are millions in the United Stated that own guns for hunting, protection, collection, or just plain out fun. Removing this would also not help anything. Good guys wouldn't have guns but bad guys still would. Besides, lots of criminals use illegal guns already so I really don't see the point.
Do you seriously expect all the criminals and gangs of America are just going to surrender their weapons to you willingly? And lets not forget its unconstitutional! Now lets look at the problem differently. What if all law-abiding American citizens were permitted to conceal carry ever since America became a nation? Imagine how low crime would be! We could have stopped Sandy Hook by teachers with guns stepping up and taking Adam Lanza out. There would have been little to no casualties those children and staff killed would still be living life. This is one of many examples where gun toting, law-abiding citizens could have solved a problem before it began.
Really? A gun is a weapon, it could be used to kill people, a car could be used to kill people, knives, rocks, these should all be illegal, because they are weapons for killing.
But it turns out that guns were actually originally used for launching fire crackers, so a gun is a tool of amusement, the first guns to be used as weapons were actually meant for defense of walls, so they are lying to you, the first pistol however was designed for a assassination though.
A deliberate lie, to push a political agenda.
Not one single study, that isn't easily discredited, supports the more guns == more violent crime story. A look at any nation in the last 50 years that enacted strict gun control shows this, the UK got worse, Australia saw no change.
You are not 44, 42, 24, 22, or 3 times more likely to be harmed by a gun in your house, the easily discredited Kellerman study was based on one single county, and failed to count any DGU that didn't result in a death.
And the list of easily discredited studies on guns goes on and on.
Increased Homicide has not been proven to correlate with guns, ever. Not sure about suicide. I would believe a correlation is possible. Accidents, also do not correlate with guns.
Think about reducing total deaths, total accidents, total suicides, etc.... The tool does not matter as much as the result, and the motive in relation to penalty, which is why countries can have low violent gun crime rates and over all high violent crime rates. Whether guns were used or not, is unimportant to the the victim. They were still the victim of a crime regardless.
Take note of gun crime statistics but remember, most gun crimes happen from repeat offenders (with illegal guns). If we take away their guns, they are still criminals. They might not commit violent gun crimes, but they'll still commit violent crimes. You can't just subtract gun crime from total crime and predict future crime. The same goes for accidents. You just can't fix stupid.
To predict the future of a gun culture in the absence of guns seems futile. Other factors typically have larger relations to crime anyway. As stated, Motive vs Penalty. The effort, odds of getting caught, and penalization need to outweigh the reward of the crime to prevent criminal activity. That's what we need to focus on. The amount of legal guns we have really has little affect other then deterrent, to varying extent.
Just like any other tool, guns can be used for good or bad. Water can give life or cause death. A fire can warm a home or burn it down. A nuclear reaction can power a city or destroy it. A gun can be used to protect/feed a family or kill them.
Banning guns would mean taking guns away from law abiding citizens while criminals would still get them, like they do other illegal things. We would have unarmed good guys and armed criminals which would be disastrous. Even without a gun a criminal can commit a crime against a weaker victim and that person might want a gun to defend them selves. Guns are used to prevent hundreds of thousands of cirmes a year. Gunssavelives.Net
I need more words apparently so I will just write random thoughts until it will let me submit my opinion. My favorite chinese restaurant is China Express. They have the best general tso chicken, except you need to get it extra spicy extra crispy or it won't be that great.
Ned words lala llala lala lala ldkkd djfjf f f f f f f f f f f f f f f e e e e e e e t t t t t th h h h h h h a a a a h h h ha a a a