Why do people want more gun control laws?

Question

If you think about it, most people say that stricter gun laws would reduce crime. But the only people who would keep the new laws in the first place are the people who didn't break the laws to begin with. So basically, they're passing laws for people who won't follow them anyway. So what's the point?

Answer 1

Look at Tombstone Arizona, they have the free range law (where you can wear a gun outside like the ol cowboy days) do you think they have any crime at all????? Hell no, everyone is carrying a gun. I carry a gun everywhere I go, does that make me a bad person? No, it doesnt. If someone tries to rob me with a gun, their stupid because I will kill them and more than likely they are using the gun as a scare tactic. I have been in Iraq 2 times, it is gonna take more than some unloaded .380 to make my nerves jump.

Answer 2

Most so called polls about the population are geared to give you choices such as the two below:

A. Do you favor more gun control?
B. Do you prefer criminals to murder more people?

Of course if you answer them, you will answer A rather than B and this is where the idea that more people want more control.

The CDC did a three year study and they could not conclude that gun control had a positive impact on crime in any way, shape or form. They claimed that despite gun control since 1936 they didn't have enough information.

Only the law abiding obey gun laws, not criminals. Anybody with any sense knows that. But many people "feel" (all emotion, no thought process) that something has to be done and gun control sounds good. This feel good, do nothing mentality is amazingly obvious in our lawmakers. It makes them feel better about them selves because they did something, but don't hold them accountable for the results.

Answer 3

Exactly. People are just looking at someone to blame. They come up with ideas that sound and look good on paper, but are not realistic. Most of the time, these ideas are to benefit someone's career, rather than society.

I couldn't have put it any better, this is the whole point why I choose not to argue with anti-gun people, as they are not looking at the problem, and it's not the guns.

In response to Abdul: No matter how many restrictions it's not going to change anything. The ones doing all the crime (gang bangers, organized crime, druggies) they are still going to have guns. As for Europe having low crime, it's because gangs and drugs are not an epidemic as they are in the States. It has nothing to do with guns. If we sent you half of the gang members in Los Angeles, your crime rate would go up 100%, guaranteed. Domestic violence where guns are involved, happens but it is not the BIG problem.

As for gun accidents, it's about awareness, training, and most importantly responsibility. People are careless, they drive drunk, run over people with cars, leave electrical devices by the tub, smoke in bed, etc...it's tragic when people lose their lives, but stricter laws aren't going to help teach people responsibility, it's up to the individual to practice it everyday.

*Gun control is using both hands

Answer 4

EXACTLY!

Notice that the states with the strictest gun control laws have the highest crime rates? And conversely, those with the fewest laws have the lowest crime rates. Those with the highest crime rates are typically states with large cities and are largely Democratic. The rural states typically have the fewest laws and the lowest crime rates - and are typically conservative (I don't like to use the term "Republican - that's another story). Cities have a higher percentage of homeless people who look to the government to solve their problems. The rural areas consist of more self-sufficient folks.

Bottom line is, it's easy to blame an inanimate object than to really do something about the problem. I've set my gun on the table and watched it for an hour - it didn't do a damn thing!!!

No - the problem is that the politicians aren't willing to deal with issues on a substantive basis using facts. Until that happens, you're going to get a revolving door criminal justice system that does nothing to eliminate the problem.

You want to eliminate crime ? Eliminate the bad guy by making the punishment severe enough that he will want to avoid it at all costs.

California Deputy
"An armed society is a polite society"

Answer 5

Instead of passing new gun control laws that only the law-abiding citizen would obey; they could better enforce the laws that are already passed. The same people who preach gun control are the same ones who also criticize laws such as the Patriot Act, that helps law enforcement agencies work together to fight crime.

The more that federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies combine their resorces and efforts, the more criminal element is removed from society. Good gun laws, such as violent convicted felons in possession of firearms can be prosecuted more effectively, and those who are truly a threat to our society are removed, instead of law-abiding citizens who has a Consitutional right to bear arms and protect themselves from the criminal element.

Just as a lock will only stop a honest person. Just as drug laws will only prevent the lawful person from selling cocaine. Gun control laws will only effect non-criminals. These laws would only serve to disarm the innocent and leave them to the mercy of the criminals.

To some the threat of getting caught and going to jail in such a lax liberalistic society that does little to punish the wrongdoer is not enough to prevent them from preying on the innocent. The fear of being shot and killed by their prey is enough to keep most of these predators at bay. Just as a lion on the plains of Africa will usually only attack the sick, weak, or lame; and not the strong and well defended animals; so will the human predators only attack those that they feel they can overcome. If you disarm the potential prey, while the predator stays armed... well you get the picture.

Instead of the politicians passing laws that would disarm the innocent, why not pass laws that would better enable law enforcement to disarm the violent criminals and separate them from society.

Answer 6

Abdul said:

"Stricter gun control laws DO reduce crime. Guns are virtually illegal in most European countries (except, bizzarely [sic], Switzerland) and yet gun crime is very low."

Gun control has never been shown to reduce crime. The European countries are an absurd analogy as those people never had guns. By contrast, the US has always had an armed populace. Unfortunately, criminals steal guns and use them on innocent victims. The state responds by suspending their sentences and otherwise getting violent thugs back on the streets as soon as possible. It is clear to any thinking person that our revolving-door "justice system" is responsible for out high crime rates. But the alleged intellectuals insist that violence is rightfully blamed on inanimate objects.
As for gun control laws being passed to reduce accidents, that may well be the line given for "locked and stored" legislation. But more people die in auto accidents than are killed by guns. Accidental shooting is not an epidemic and kills far fewer people than negligent doctors, yet heavy focus remains on guns. Why is that?
Perhaps government is more concerned with people control than with crime reduction and reducing accidents.

Answer 7

The Liberals have tried to wiggle around the Second Amendment without calling for its enforcement as written.
My most recent readings in The Progressive suggest this
may change. More militant Liberals urge Civil Authorities
to recognize and certify state militia if armed with weapons of military value. All other ownership of such weapons could then be better declared null and void. Should the non-militia
citizens bearing military valued weapons become hostile then the mission for militia as defined by the Second Amendment becomes clear; Hostiles, it would seem,
return to militia agenda. Civil Authorities would move upon the ammunition and arms providers as they did on
those who provided Native American Indians with military
issue weapons. Hanging at Fort Smith, Arkansas, was
usual penalty after trial by The Honerable Judge Parker.

Answer 8

Un-informed opinions. Everyone jumps to conclusions with out facts. Just like hybrid cars, sure they sound great, but what happens in 5 years when all the batteries need replaced, can you say landfill. Its only purpose is political gain, most people that are against guns have no experience with guns, just whats on the TV. Unfortunately for California, that accounts for most people, other wise the laws would change.

Answer 9

Because people who buy guns like to put them in their childrens toy boxes. After the kids accidentally kill their parents, they realize that killing is fun, so they go and shoot everyone else. It happens every day. lol Guns are more likely to kill law abiding gun owners because the criminals with guns out number them. This is because buying a gun and getting a concealed weapon permit costs money and alot of red tape, and people don't know how to do it, so they just don't go to the trouble. Criminals, on the other hand, steal guns and hide em anywhere they want cause they're gangsta like that.

Answer 10

Gun control is only favored by hypocritcal power hungry politicians, and people brainwashed by them. You see in the new often how the gun controller have run ins with the law by having and concealing guns illegally. Hypocracy to the max.