Gun laws do they work (2 Viewers)

Dick7Access

Dick S
Local time
Today, 03:39
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
4,197
Does anybody have hard facts that show that Gun Control works?
 

Sketchin

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 00:39
Joined
Dec 20, 2011
Messages
575
I would argue that it makes no difference. If someone wants a gun, they can get a gun. Look at Canada's gun registration waste of billions of taxpayers money, mess.
 

Anakardian

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 08:39
Joined
Mar 14, 2010
Messages
173
In Denmark we have about 46 homocides per year. The majority is committed using knives or other stabbing weapons.
Guns are generally illegal and have been for many many years.
 

Libre

been around a little
Local time
Today, 00:39
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
660
Does anybody have hard facts that show that Gun Control works?

I'm sure there are statistics that can be dug up, but would they show that it works? Probably not. To prove something works takes more than statistics. But if we can rely on logic, then of course gun control works. In the total absence of any gun control, then a mass murderer could walk into a 5 and dime and buy a machine gun. After all, if there is NO control, then anything goes. I doubt anybody would argue for NO control. So there has to be SOME control, the question is how much. It depends on the area and the local mores. In NYC, I don't want to see a big increase in weapons, legal or illegal. We have enough trouble as it is. My feeling is that more guns = more shootings, not less.
 

Sketchin

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 00:39
Joined
Dec 20, 2011
Messages
575
. My feeling is that more guns = more shootings, not less.

You would think...but Canada has more guns per capita than the U.S and has substantially less gun crime.

I believe it's more of a societal problem than a simple "I can buy a gun so I'm going to shoot someone" problem. Im not a sociologist either, so I'm going to stop talking now...:)

Although with that said, I find it insane that you can walk into a gun shop in Montana and walk out with a pistol.
 

Dick7Access

Dick S
Local time
Today, 03:39
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
4,197
You would think...but Canada has more guns per capita than the U.S and has substantially less gun crime.

I believe it's more of a societal problem than a simple "I can buy a gun so I'm going to shoot someone" problem. Im not a sociologist either, so I'm going to stop talking now...:)

Although with that said, I find it insane that you can walk into a gun shop in Montana and walk out with a pistol.

well said!
 

Lightwave

Ad astra
Local time
Today, 07:39
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
1,521
Good question I don't think there's any stand out evidence either way.

However I am never very convinced about the line

"we need guns to protect ourselves"

The people that start shooting up their neighbourhood always generally target the innocent and always rely on the element of surprise .

Chances are when you really need that gun - you won't have it on you.

So my feeling is that you're safer making it very difficult to get guns than trusting everyone with a gun.
 
Last edited:

Lightwave

Ad astra
Local time
Today, 07:39
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
1,521
I think there is evidence that a lot of crime is opportunistic.

That means that if you can delay a crime or make it awkward it's not put off to the next day it potentially will never happen.

Hence make gun ownership difficult and a disgruntled teenager will go off and vandalise something rather than going to the local supermarket with a semi-automatic.

I believe that is the thinking behind the policy of making it very awkward to own a gun in the UK.
 

Vassago

Former Staff Turned AWF Retiree
Local time
Today, 03:39
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
4,751
I think Sketchin hit the nail on the head. It's a social issue. In the US, we have a large amount of crime and much of it comes in from outside our borders. There was a shipping container found recently from the islands that had hundreds of illegal guns. If we outlaw guns, what's to stop the criminals from obtaining them? Nothing. They will still find a way. The argument that having legal carriers makes it easier for criminals to get them is of course true, but how many people legally own guns today compared to the number that end up in criminal hands from legal means? The statistics are complicated to justify that as a valid excuse to have more gun control.

Also, murder may be at a lower rate per capita in countries without guns, but what about other types of crime. Statistically, you usually see a much higher number of random acts of violence, armed robbery, car theft, and mugging in countries where guns are banned than in countries where they are not. Do you think that having legal gun owners in the US lowers the chance of being a victim of a random act of violence because criminals don't know if the potential victim may be a carrier? Most murders are not random acts of violence, but thought out and planned. If someone wants someone dead, they will find a way, with or without guns. Random acts of burglary and car-jacking on the other hand are completely random more often than not.
 

Libre

been around a little
Local time
Today, 00:39
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
660
The problem with civilians carrying, is that there are so many hot heads and nut jobs out there that allowing it seems BOUND to lead to trouble.
I have heard it said (and I totally believe it) that a gun in the home is far more likely to be involved in an accidental shooting than in legitimate self defense.
 

Galaxiom

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 18:39
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
12,849
Statistically, a gun is ten times more likely to kill one of the owner's family members than a criminal intruder. They make very poor case for gun ownership as a defence.
 

Galaxiom

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 18:39
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
12,849
Aurora, the scene of the lastest mass shooting is twelve miles from Columbine.

The biggest industry in Columbine is weapon manufacture. Perhaps that is sending a bad signal to the young people who live in the area.
 

Dick7Access

Dick S
Local time
Today, 03:39
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
4,197
Statistically, a gun is ten times more likely to kill one of the owner's family members than a criminal intruder. They make very poor case for gun ownership as a defence.

Please send me the web site for those statistics.
 

recyan

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 13:09
Joined
Dec 30, 2011
Messages
180
Not only sickening, also, feel very very sad, for all those, who had to face this either directly or in-directly.
Leads to thinking, whether, we humans have reached a stage, where, expecting some-one to behave responsibly & humanly, is stupidity.
 

John Big Booty

AWF VIP
Local time
Today, 18:39
Joined
Aug 29, 2005
Messages
8,263
So if civilian gun ownership, is so good for stopping crime; why didn't one of the many gun owner at Aurora take down James Holmes and put an end to his rampage?
 

Lightwave

Ad astra
Local time
Today, 07:39
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
1,521
Because the element of surprise in a public setting tends to completely negate gun ownership as a defense.
 

Fifty2One

Legend in my own mind
Local time
Today, 00:39
Joined
Oct 31, 2006
Messages
1,412
Canada's gun registration troubles were due to mismanagement and lack of control in the law. The intent was merely a registry in order to match evidence of crime to possible persons committing the crime or crimes. Refusal to sign onto the registry by individuals was also a major downfall in the construction of the database. Perhaps all citizens of Canada should refuse to register their cars next so they can escape their responsibilities and liability in the same manner.

I would argue that it makes no difference. If someone wants a gun, they can get a gun. Look at Canada's gun registration waste of billions of taxpayers money, mess.
 

Dick7Access

Dick S
Local time
Today, 03:39
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
4,197
I have heard it said (and I totally believe it) that a gun in the home is far more likely to be involved in an accidental shooting than in legitimate self defense.

One who is in favor of gun control would believe the above. Those that are opposed to gun control would want facts before believing it. However, Libre well said when he pointed out that most everybody wants some gun control, but the level of gun control is usually the question. I can’t quote any statics but I heard said on the radio a couple of days ago that the more liberal a person is in other matters the more gun control they are in favor of. Then again to quote a pundit of yesteryears (can’t remember his name), there are lies, dam lies, and statics.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom