You can't have your cake and eat it, too. Either give up virtually any right to firearms, submit to searches on request and be "safe" (Gun related deaths reduced, sure. People just find other ways to intimidate and murder.) Or eliminate restrictions on anything less than a rocket launcher, and watch the same thing happen, too. Also, I have to call bullshit on at least the post about British officers feeling "safe". You have to be joking, because no police officer just strolls around feeling safe and whistling all day. They'd be out of a job if it was that blissfully crime-free.
There is no problem with good American citizens owning guns. It is the criminal element of this country that is the problem and the lack of consequences and punishment given out by the court system of this country for Criminal's who commit crimes while using or possessing a firearm. A slap on the wrist will not deter someone from committing crimes again with a firearm. We need to be tougher on criminals and make the consequences for people who are criminals and deemed convicted felons severe. Yes if guns are band only criminals will have them and the good people of this country would be in bad shape while enemies foreign and domestic will take over.
Yes, when weapons are outlawed only outlaws will have weapons. This is a ancient Chinese proverb. It is true today, once guns are outlawed and you own a gun, you are an outlaw. If you surrender your guns, in compliance with the law you are at a distinct disavantage to criminals.
If the government outlaws firearms, then only criminals will have access to them. No matter what laws are passed, criminals will be able to get their hands on firearms via smuggling, robbery ect. If banning guns would stop criminals from having them, I say go for it. But that will not happen. It also stands to reason that banning firearms would also result in many violent battles, because many Americans WILL NOT give up what their country was founded on.
The reverse of this statement is also true if guns were available to everyone, then everyone would have a gun. The point of this aphorism is that if someone wants to get away with a gun-related crime, they will do so no matter how restrictive or unrestrained gun laws are in the United States. We can ban every gun on the planet and some psycho will still find a firearm and kill 20 people at a peace rally. I'd rather err on the side of freedom and arm everyone as a deterrent to get into a gunfight. Gun rights are like the Cold War--the U.S. and Soviets were afraid to use nukes because of retaliation from the other side that would destroy the planet. Guns are the same way--if everyone has one and carries one, it's a deterrent to drawing your weapon in the first place.
Yes, it is true that when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns, because a law only stops a law-abiding person from doing something. A locked door only keeps a law-abiding person from entering. Someone who wants a gun to hurt others will find a way to get one. Some countries will always make them, and they can even be printed.
This question can be easily debated, but the way I see it, is very true. If the Government decides to completely ban guns, then those who decide to keep them and show it off are obviously breaking the law. Therefore, in a way, that makes them complete outlaws to society.
It is true that 'when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.' When some thing is outlawed, many people that are living above the law will turn in what ever is found to be illegal. The people that resist doing this or refuse to do it at all are outlaws.
The problem with gun control is that is prevents the legal circulation of firearms but does not explicitly deal with how to stop criminals from ever obtaining guns. If legal gun dealerships are banned, the black market will still exist. Unless the cops finally decide to deal with gun runners and the black market, criminals will still have guns. Unless we deal with the black market directly, there is a good chance criminals will have guns no matter what we do. Most shooters have clean records so most laws will not stop them anyway but real criminals would not go to a gun shop, so if you were to cut off their illegal gun supplier and they will actually be disarmed
It is true that 'when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns'. If the outlaw wants a gun then they are going to be able to get a hold of one. We need to start allowing our citizens to carry their weapons so that they can protect themselves and others.
No one republican or democrate ever wanted to outlaw guns.....Assault weapons yes.....And if you outlaw them its not true only crimanals will have them....If this were true then why all the crazy doing mass shooting never used a machine gun....?.????....Because everyone knows if you have one your going to prison....So why this talk of outlawing all guns?It will never happen in this great country.
1. That statement presupposes that criminals are somehow smarter than the general population because they'll be able to get guns and the general population won't. But criminals are usually stupider than the general population.
2. The reason criminals can get guns now is that everyone can get guns now. So, unless we can stop the wrong people from getting guns, we are going to continue to have problems.
3. The proposition "...Only outlaws will have guns" presupposes that it is a good thing that it is a good thing that everyone is armed so that we can use guns against the criminals - a kind of vigilante society. Is that really what we want? Do we really want people taking the law into their own hands?
The NRA likes to quote the saying “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will own guns”
Well, let’s test the theory
Fact: In England, guns are tightly regulated. Few people are allowed to own and carry guns
So…you’d expect all the outlaws in England would be running terrorizing the country with guns. Right??
In fact just the OPPOSITE IS TRUE. England is so safe from gun violence that their police DON’T EVEN CARRY GUNS.
In your wildest dreams can you even imagine that ever happening in the USA? An on duty cop without a gun???? That would be a cop’s death sentence. They would refuse to come to work. Because in the USA…all the outlaws have guns!!!
When English police don’t even have to carry weapons, it only means one thing. The English police feel SAFE that criminals , insane people, terrorists or out-of-control citizens ….Are NOT armed with machine guns, semi automatic assault rifles and pistols.
Why. Because machine guns, semi automatic assault rifles and pistols are OUTLAWED in England.
Yes, there will always be people who get illegal access to weapons, but outlaws aren't just going to magically find weapons as easily as they do now, if they're not legally available anymore. That's just magical thinking and a way to justify not changing anything.
The fact is, the US is responsible for 50% of the world's mass shootings in the last three or more decades. If the rest of the world can get by with far less gun violence without also toppling over on itself, then US really doesn't have the excuse to refuse to change in this way.
The Sandy Hook incident is considered one of the worst things to happen in recent American History. There have been 74 shootings in the US since then.
What more evidence do you really need?
While it certainly depends on what one means by guns being outlawed, if guns weren't available to the everyday public, they will still be used by trained personnel such as the military and police. There is no way that it would extend to no one in the entire country having weapons. Additionally, a law against gun ownership, would probably also not extend to people like competitive marksmen and shooters, such as those competing in the Olympic games. Even in countries with very restricted gun ownership there are still exceptions for people who have a legitimate use and need for them.
Without exception, Every law could be refuted with the lawbreaker’s paradox, And societies would swiftly descend into anarchy if it weren’t for reasonable policymakers. Laws against rape, Murder, And theft, For example, Are rarely followed by rapists, Murderers, And thieves, But the fact that such people exist in society is the reason behind such regulations in the first place.
Sure, Outlaws might have guns if guns are outlawed; but no one can legally become an outlaw if guns are not legally available for purchase. (Sure, Outlaws might have guns if guns are outlawed; but no one can legally become an outlaw if guns are not legally available for purchase. )
Read the book, “guns don’t kill people, People kill people
And other myths about gun gun control”, By Dennis A. Henigan. It really goes into depth about this argument. Before we decide wether this is true or not, We need to define outlaw. Not all outlaws are criminals, And not all criminals are outlaws. JUST READ THE BOOK
Law enforcement and others specifically permitted to have guns would still have guns. The underlying irrational fear is that if guns are banned from the general population then the result is an unstoppable force of armed criminals roaming the street who prey on law abiding citizens. All one needs to do is look at every country the has limited or banned gun ownership to know that criminals aren't terrorizing the populace with their illegal firearms. Germany, England, Japan, Australia... Firearm- brandishing-criminals just aren't running amok.
There are a lot of children accidently shoot each other every day. A lot of teen suicides are done with guns they found in their law abiding homes.
If guns are outlawed, only outlaw kids will be able to shoot themselves of their friends.
This is an anachronistic and unevolved aspect of our culture that we can consider an error in thinking caused by the primordial fear of the Other. It is our cycle to complete the destiny of coming together in awareness of our Goodness. Consciousness has arrived like a fog that allows recognition.