will banning guns stop shootings?

Question

i dont think so crims will always get guns. it just takes weapons out of the real uses for guns. ie sports and hunting and protection from the crims. t

Answer 1

kind of silly isnt it.
passing a law bannign guns will mean that the people who follow the law wont have guns.

But the people who dont really care about lawm like the criminals we have.... well they'll surely ignore it, and then the people who may need to defend themselves will have followed the law and ... oh wait they cant have guns too?!

Answer 2

It would help. Stop the sale of replicas is the first step, then invest money in tracking down the gun suppliers. The police pay people to inform on the drug dealers so why not do the same for the gun trade? Also the society we grow up in glamorises guns to males from a young age, thru Clint Eastwood, Arnold Schwarzenegger, etc. Now all of a sudden society wants to tell kids its bad.

Answer 3

Guns are designed to kill!
That's what they do!
There should be absolutely no legitimate reason to have a gun in private ownership.
I would outright ban private ownership. Treat possession as a crime as serious as plotting to kill, for that is a fairly good description of what it means to own a gun.
I'd face down the sporting lobby, they can just darn well find another sport that doesn't involve lethal firearms.

Of course the streets would still be full of illegal guns, but it would seriously effect the flow of new guns and ammunition. Which in turn would raise the street value of guns out of the reach of many criminals.

Answer 4

You've answered the question very well yourself!
In the UK you cannot carry a weapon on the grounds of Protection. It would make you as much a criminal as the ones you are trying to protect yourself from. (2 wrongs never make a right) Other-wise you are correct. The criminal will get the gun as easily as the Junkie gets his drugs and the Boozer gets his alcohol where prohibition is in force!

Answer 5

Mass shootings are an unlucky area results of the right to bear hands. notwithstanding, maximum those who're injured or killed by guns are not to any extent further performed so in mass shootings. those who've guns especially for the objective of committing crimes, notwithstanding, are going to have the even if or not they're criminal or no longer. those who've guns for the objective of protection will provide their guns up in the journey that they are unlawful and subsequently be unable to shelter themselves from criminals. maximum gun vendors are very to blame with their guns. it would not be honest to penalize them to remove guns from the hands of an massive minority. as well to, it would take more suitable than in simple terms Obama to strike down the second one change, which could be the in effortless words thanks to illegalize gun possession. 2 thirds of both the residing house and the Senate ought to agree on it, and albeit, there are not to any extent further sufficient democrats, a lot less democrats who would help repealing the second one change, in congress to succeed in this.

Answer 6

No, of course it wouldn't as only law abiding citizens obey laws,criminals do not and would thus still have their weapons. Regarding any posters that state it would reduce the availability of guns..it would not as any machinist or mechanically inclined do-it yourselfer will tell you a firearm is not that difficult to make in ones own workshop so rest assured the criminal element would manage to get weapons. The poster who claimed more people are killed accidentally than by criminals..he is extremely ignorant and obviously misinformed to believe any lies and propaganda like that... accidental deaths involving firearms have reached their lowest point since they started being recorded in 1903 and you are 80 times more likely to die in an automobile accident than by firearm accident.

Answer 7

Banning guns will not stop the problem,enforcement of the laws will and building more prisons will help and make inmates serve their full sentence. Don't even try to take mine away I'm a disabled retired Sheriff and i need my guns.

Answer 8

First off, Nice picture Michael N.

i agree with you, criminals can always get guns. Many of the guns used in crimes are not legally purchased. Therefore, if you take away the guns of people that lawfully are able to carry and the criminals will still have their guns. Heck, the ones that the criminals have are better than my Glock and S&W. Who says girls can't shoot?

Answer 9

Banning will not stop someone carrying one around or even using one. The government need to look further than just bans and longer jail terms. Personally I feel the government need to look more into "why" people carry them not just "how" they get them. Usually any type of weapon carried around is used for self-defence. So the threats out there need to be stopped. People need to feel safe in order not to carry such things. Society as a whole needs to change in order to lower these crimes dramitically.

Answer 10

More people in America and other country's are killed by accident with guns than by criminals - in other words legal guns.Why legalise something that will cause more deaths.Shootings in UK though blown up by the media are minimal compared to other countries.