Does gun control do more to disarm criminals and protect the public, or disarm the public and empower criminals?Posted by: Throwback
This poll does not address the 2nd Amendment which clearly establishes gun rights; merely the concept of outlawing guns if it were constitutional.
Gun control disarms criminals, thereby protecting the public.
Gun control disarms the public, empowering criminals.
Gun control laws require at least 1 of 2 things to be effective. Either guns must be made unavailable, even illegally, or everyone must comply with the law. Neither of these can be accomplished. 1. Gun technology cannot be un invented and whether legally or not, they will be available. 2. a. Those intent on committing crimes, especially crimes of violence, will not be dissuaded from using a gun to commit the crime because of a gun ban. The underlying crime they are willing to commit is already illegal. b. Law abiding citizens would be disarmed. The only guns, then, would be in the hands of criminals. With gun rights, I am ready, willing, and able to instantaneously decapitate in a loud manner anyone who breaks into my home to do a member of my family harm, or bring on the demise in a similar fashion of anyone committing or attempting to commit a violent crime in public. If guns were banned, the crime would still be perpetrated, and the victim could not be defended until police arrived, which is often too late.
Criminals don't abide to gun laws.
If guns are banned criminals will still get them. We'd have armed criminals and unarmed good guys.
Just use common sense. Why are people called criminals? Because they are law abiding citizens? Well, it does seem we are trying to make every citizen a criminal.
Only law-abiding citizens obey the law, not criminals. As a consequence, anti-gun laws put citizens in the risk. Besides, criminals don't give a rat's ass about laws.