Do you think that we would be better off if we had stronger Gun control?

Question

Now this is a question comeing From someone that is a member of the Nra but I really would like to know what other people thinik on this issue

Answer 1

i honestly don't think so, just for the simple fact that if people want something they will get it. if they make it harder to get guns or restrict who can get them people will just do what they already do now, get the illegally. just like drugs. if you want something bad enough you will find a way to get it. i think that actually would cause more people to steal guns and buy them illegally. i do support the right to bear arms but not everyone should be able to have that right. it would be almost impossible to determine who is worthy of that right if they have no crimminal record.

Answer 2

No, the US would not be better off. It's not the laws that are at fault or not working (although enforcing the current laws might be a good move) it is simply the matter of the US gun culture itself: Americans accept gun violence as part of US culture. They may wail and moan and wring their hands and look for someone to blame, but in the end they do nothing about the culture of violence itself.

That statement often upsets a lot of Americans because they don't like to accept the truth, they often have a bizarre notion that their country isn't violent, but the reality is that many other countries don't have the same gun problems and yet often have similar levels of per capita gun ownership. The simple fact is that Americans shoot each other and until they decide that isn't acceptable then it will continue at the rate it does.

And all said and done, nothing will ever stop loonies losing the plot while armed - gun controls and saner gun use cultural norms, whatever.

Answer 3

I really think we would be worse off. Gun-related crimes would not decline -- in fact, they'd probably get worse -- and people would be less able to defend themselves from such things. I know it's a worn-out argument, but it's still the best one: if someone's threatening you with a gun, they likely won't want to sit down and talk through it, they will want to take what they want and they will shoot you if they don't get it. If you have a gun, even threatening to use one against such a threat is often very effective in deterring said threat; if it comes down to you having to use it to keep the other person from killing you -- well, to be blunt, you can't use it if you don't have it!

Also, I fail to understand how government control on firearms is going to stop criminals from getting them. If they can't get the guns in a legal fashion, they will find some less than savory way to get them if they really want them. They have little regard for the law or the rights of human beings as it is; what makes gun control people think that they'll stop at theft or participation in a black market, I will never understand.

Someone farther up mentioned that the United Kingdom has 35% fewer gun deaths per year than the United States and placed all of the responsibility for that on gun control. I shouldn't need to remind anyone that the United Kingdom's population is one fifth that of the United States; therefore, the UK's gun death toll is actually higher than that of the US.

Answer 4

You cannot know when, where, how, who,what is going to use a firearm in a violent manner.. Laws are not the answer. there are already an abundance of gun laws.. You cannot legislate responsible gun ownership.. The people who use them in a violent way are a minority.. That doesn't mean we the Majority should be denied ownership because of other peoples rampages.. Which would you rather be a Victim or Survivor> Predator or Prey?? Whether it be by an individual or a Government....

Answer 5

Simple equation

Guns + idiots = death

Both are plentiful in the USA.

You can't do much about the idiots but you can do something about the guns.

I will point out again that the UK has 35 times lower rate of gun deaths than the USA because guns are tightly controlled. Gun control can work but you need your politicians to make it happen, so it looks like you are stuffed.

Answer 6

The guns used in VT were illegal, more gun control laws would not have stopped this.

There are some things I would like to see put in place, but it wouldn't have stopped this.

Biometric locks for guns and tagging ammo are things that just seem like a no brainer to me.

Answer 7

Maybe a little, but I don't want the government to have easier access to weapons than the citizens, that can open the door to tyrrany.

Had this madman not had access to guns he would have gone into Va Tech's cafeteria at lunchtime with a bomb strapped to his chest.

Answer 8

First lets sift through some facts.

Criminals do not obey laws.
The purpose of the second amendment is to allow us to keep an oppresive government in check, we are the final checks and balances, they work for us, we are not their subjects.
Laws do not prevent crime.

SO based on those three facts it would appear the answer to your question is a roaring NO.

Answer 9

I think we'd be better off if everyone had a gun! Gun control only works for those who follow the law. How can you make bad guys quit being bad guys and say, "Oh, I think I'll follow this gun control law now?"

Answer 10

No because there is more than one way for crazy people to get a hold of a gun...black market anyone?

Wahoo NRA!!!