Do stricter gun control measures create lower crime rates ?

Answer 1

Nope. Look at DC. You cant own a gun and crime is sky high.
New York is another example. Where I lived in Idaho everyone had a gun. Crime was pretty much non-existent. Do some research. The facts speak for themselves.

Answer 2

1

Answer 3

Nope. Not now, not ever. Never have.

Washington DC and New York City have the most restrictive gun control in the USA, yet have the highest crime rates.

The simple and incontrovertible fact is that the Government has no legal obligation to protect you, only to find and convict criminals. They can and will no nothing until after a crime has been committed, so if you can not have a means of self-protection, then by the very nature of the system, more crimes will be committed because a higher percentage of the people will be unable to protect themselves and stop crimes. Before long, that portion of the criminal world that may not have committed certain acts because of the possibility of encountering resistance, will be out in full force, and the crime rates will spiral out of control.

Answer 4

The CDC (Center for Disease Control) did a two year long study about this very question. Gun control has been around in this country for a long time but start with the gun control act of 1938 and go from there. the CDC claimed it couldn't come up with enogh data to show that gun control has any impact on crime. The CDC is notoriously anti gun. For them to make such a claim most likely means that thier results show that gun control doesn't equate to crime control in any way shape or form.

Professor Gary Kleck, a criminologist in Florida set out to prove once and for all that gun control would reduce crime. After years of research he concluded just the oppisite is true. In the final analysis, the more law abiding citizens who own guns, the less crime.

Frankly I could have told him that.

Answer 5

No, they raise them. The gun control measure only affect the law abiding people. This makes them unable to defend themselves against criminals.

Politicians know this. It is not only common sense, it has been documented in many studies, and in a book called MORE GUNS, LESS CRIME.

Just ask yourself, if suddenly there were ten times as many armed police officers on the street, what effect do you think it would have on crime? Most people think that it would tend to deter crime, as the criminals would feel intimidated at that number of armed adversaries. Now, consider the effect on criminals if they knew that a great many people in that town were armed, and knew how to use their weapons. What do you think would be the effect on criminals?

It is too bad that our politicians care so little about our welfare. They are not interested in reducing crime, they are more interested in exploiting crime, to pass more laws.

The best example of this is Washington, DC. It is almost impossible for ordinary citizens to legally own a firearm. The politicians, on the other hand, have personal security personnel to protect them (at taxpayer expense). Washington, DC is the per capita murder capital of the nation.

Answer 6

First off think about it. Do you really think guns used in crimes were gained through legal means? No, they aren't. So stricter laws will do nothing for it. It will only effect those who legally own firearms and obey the laws. It will take away protection of those who go through legal means to own firearms and receive their CCW. It's a stop sign in a high speed chase.

The only people the 'stricter' gun control laws will effect is Law abiding citizens, and all it will do is give the criminals a foot up on citizens.

As by law abiding citizens I mean those who follow present gun laws, received their firearm though legal means, and take the proper precaution with their firearms.

Answer 7

No. If you would examine, the State of California and the State of New York, where one has to have permission from God to buy a hand gun, register it, register it in the county and city they live in and then go through other hoops, you will find high crime. Gun control is just a way the left tries to sell us on controling crime, but it is dangerous. Some other great guys in history were big on gun control. They were Adolf Hitler, Joesf Stalin and Mao Tse Tung. Totalarian dicators are always pro gun control. They fear the citizen with the gun.

Answer 8

The criminal group will always find a way to commit the crime irregardless ,but a control on armaments would reduce the carnage created by impulsive use of the gun , from children ,women to elderly the ones more likely to fall pray to the availability of the gun would be spared to live longer . In Canada is illegal to carry a gun unless having a permit and well registered , and it is a fact that per ca-pita we have the lowest death rate due to the stringent law , you see people one time or another become obsessed hot headed imbeciles that resort to use the gun first and then ask questions after , so yes to gun law...

Answer 9

No way. There are already laws in place concerning the use of firearms in the commission of a crime. However, lawyers usually plea bargain this away. Perhaps if the justice system was more tough on criminals this would help. More gun control laws just restrict the rights af law abibing citizens. Criminals do not register thier guns.

Answer 10

I think the answer, if you take canada's gun laws into account, than the answer is most certainly no. The united states has a horrible propensity for firearm crimes than most other industrialized nations. Japan has very few crimes perpetrated with guns, but they are illegal. However conversly, the insidences of domestic crimes are much higher than other countries. Canada has a huge handgun population. They love their guns up there, and there is very, and i mean very little crimes involving a firearm. Taking guns away completely would cut down on crimes involving firearms, but I think that the criminality of those individuals would manifest itself in some other lethal manner.