Gun Control and Crime?

Question

Interesting how when an INFORMED public is able to own guns legaly, violent crime drops. Criminals don't want to attack somebody who might have to ablility to up and blow them away. This benefits everyone, including those who do NOT own guns, as criminals will be hesitant to commit the crime.

shoot.bang, nice answer...

Kevin K., how long do you think it takes on average for a cop to arrive on scene? If some guy drags you into a dark alley and threatens you, are you going to whip out your cell and call the police? It takes on avg. (correct me if this is incorrect) one and one half minutes for a police officer to arrive on scene. You could be dead and the killer could be a block away by then.

Ummm, bootycreord, just so you know, I am an INFORMED high school student who believes that gun control contributes to crime. Being that I'm in high school, I can't be Charlten Heston. Though I may be his son...

Answer 1

yea look in the states with strict gun laws like California theres a shitload of gun crime i think if California were to loosen up on there gun laws there would be less crime. it's not like criminals buy them legally in almost every gun crime the gun is stolen.

Answer 2

You are assuming way too much here. First of which is that America has an INFORMED public. There are too many idiots out there for me to feel comfortable in letting them run around with firearms.

Secondly, most Americans already have the right to own guns legally (felons and children are the big exceptions). What most Americans don't have is the right to carry firearms, especially concealed weapons. A criminal might think twice if he sees a bunch of people wearing holsters on their hips; but the usual second thought is "Who isn't wearing a holster?"

What would happen to the number of accidental shootings if everybody was armed? Significant increases would certainly happen. This wouldn't bother me much if the people injured were only the ones handling the firearm improperly. Unfortunately, the truth is the injuries and deaths would include innocent victems.

Personally, I think that its better to let the police handle the crimefighting instead of deputizing the general population.

Answer 3

Yes that is very interesting indeed. I find it also extremely interesting that a very large number of young women are taking up the shooting sports and otherwise learning to use firearms.

I live in Louisiana and after Katrina hit last year people were lining up at gun stores and gun shows to buy firearms. The largest segment was women aged 21 to 35.

My daughter is 38 and she has a concealed carry permit. She is a Pharmacist and is very concerned she will be waylaid and forced to return to the Pharmacy. Heaven help the poor bastard that tries because she knows how to use her pistol.

Answer 4

When will all of you silly little boys grow up, stop playing cowboy, and realize that the incoherent drivel put together by slaveowners two centuries is out of date and out of wack. Countries where intelligent populations put heavy restrictions on the ownership of guns have murder rates far below those of this country. Scaredy cats like you, who sense a killer around every corner, do not help things by crying Second Ammendment any time the gun issue comes up. If you are that frightened why not at least support a ban on handguns? You could still defend your trailers with rifles and shotguns which are not as concealable as handguns, making it unlikely that you would stuff one into your overworked waistband and walk into 7-11 to shoot a clerk and pick up a little pocket change. And when will you level with, if no one else, yourselves and admit that your guns are only dangerous phallic pacifiers to make up for what you are lacking in your pants?

Answer 5

I agree. The answer to the school related crimes is not gun control (which some responders will probably suggest). This is far too radical, and violates the 2nd ammendment. I think Legislators should crack down on parents of teens who commit gun crimes, however. The NRA needs to become more active at offering solutions to gun crime. IT is in their best interest to be pro-active, while continuing to uphold our constitutional rights.
I feel just as strongly about defending the 2nd ammendment as any gun freak, and I agree with your point , but gun owners need to understand that if they are not responsible with their guns, it may end up hurting their cause. Everytime a kid commits another crime with a gun, it is a notch in the belt of gun control advocates. Start being pro active, it is in your best interest. Wise up. Start a bumper sticker campaign with the following words>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

PARENTS, LOCK UP YOUR GUNS!

I'm on your side, but you need to understand that it is possible to defend our rights, while also being concerned about GUN CRIME that is the result of negligent gun owners

School related crimes are a legitimate issue that are sometimes a result of a negligent gun owning parent, until you understand that and become pro-active, it is a force that will work against your cause.
I've emailed the NRA with my concerns, because I don't want to live under a tyrannical government that takes away guns, but I got no reply

Answer 6

I have been shooting riffles since I was 11 years old. I later moved to shot guns and hand guns. I was taught a lot about hunting, tracking and shooting with responsibility.

I have nothing against guns. I think that to disarm our "good" citizens now would open us up to a world of violence beyond what we are currently experiencing.

I have a lot of strong opinions about gun safety, but that is the way I was taught. I have a healthy respect for these weapons.

Good Luck and Take Care.

Answer 7

They banned handguns in the UK
and look as if by magic all handgun crime has dissappeard

I used to shoot hand guns and people with fireamrs licences were some of the most law abiding people in the country. We had to be otherwise we would lose our licence.

the only effect the ban had was to deprive people of the sport. Criminals still have them.

What was the likelyhood of a criminal thinking, oh dear i better hand my gun in, they have been made illegal,
DOH

Answer 8

I agree. And Atticus Flinch does not live in reality. He is a liberal who believes that his haughty ideas can be used as a substitute for reality.

If we were able to ban guns criminals would not be dissuaded from obtaining and using them, as via their profession they are not constrained by laws on the books. Gun control means that more criminals are put at a competitive advantage relative to law abiding citizens.

Ever notice that the cities that are the biggest hell-holes, violent crime wise, have the strictest gun control laws (Chicago, NYC, LA) also have the largest gang problems and number of shootings? Thats because the gangs run wild knowing that their potential victims are unarmed.

Answer 9

Canada has the same per capita rate of gun ownership as does the USA. Switzerland's is higher. Canada and Switzerland have very low rates of violent crime. The high crime rate in the USA is not a result of gun ownership. There are other social factors involved and it is possible that the crime rate in the US would be higher if ordinary citizens did not have guns and could not defend themselves against armed criminals.

The laws for gun ownership in Canada and Switzerland are very strict. You have to be a law abiding citizen or resident to own a gun in Canada. In Switzerland you have to be a law abiding citizen. There are waiting periods for checks and the illegal sale or possession of firearms is a very serious crime.

Obviously the USA needs to tighten its laws and also have a good look at why it has so many violent crimes.

But in a democracy, why should only the government have access to guns? The purpose of citizen gun ownership is to defend oneself against crime, defend one's country against invaders, and also to defend one's country against tyrannical government!

Answer 10

the death rate of innocent people is still higher in the US than in
other countries without legal guns ... but rather than getting stuck in the middle of an endless fray for nothing I suggest the prevalence of non lethal weapons makes more sense works better against crime and is less destructive in collateral as well as innocent damage by accident . think about how foolish the present system is just because of stubborn clinging to the past.