If drug laws can't stop people from abusing drugs, how are guns laws suppose to reduce gun abuse?

Answer 1

They can't and won't because guns have been in American society for so long that there is no way to get rid of them, even if most people supported such an idea. There will always be a market for them and someone will always find a way to get them.

Answer 2

"If drug laws can't stop people from abusing drugs, how are guns laws suppose to reduce gun abuse?"

There is no quick answer to your question.

I must disagree with your premise. Drug control laws do stop some people from abusing drugs-- but, as with all issues of deterrence, it's hard to quantify just how many. Drug laws also fail to stop some people from abusing drugs. Probably the biggest reason for that is that most illegal drugs are habit-forming-- that is, they are addictive. So, once you've done it a couple of times, you're hooked. And then even the law is not particularly persuasive.

I strongly support the right of peaceable persons to possess and carry firearms (appropriately). But since firearms are by their very nature dangerous, there should be reasonable laws in place that make sure that danger doesn't spill out into the streets. I suspect that many more people would carry and use firearms inappropriately where there are few laws that discourage them from doing so. But, having carried a concealed firearm for many years, I also know there's at least one person out there who does so responsbily.

It's true-- and a good criticism-- that the many thousands of gun laws across all levels of government throughout the U.S. are failing us. But it's not because no law is good law.

There should be a uniform federal law that defines the rights of peaceable Americans-- and a national schema that makes sure each state (and preemptively at the state level-- where there aren't a zillion local ordinances) can make sensible laws suitable to their particular circumstances.

Then, maybe, gun abuse will be more preventable-- where a strong citizenry polices itself in concert with law enforcement to make inappropriate firearm use (gun abuse) less common.

There might still be Columbines and VTechs. Sometimes peaceable citizens go bad (though guns were around for a long time without the kind of gun violence we've seen sporadically since the 60s and more often in recent years-- and it would be nice to return to the days when a lot of people had guns and little harm came of it).

And there will still be a black market for firearms-- though it is nowhere near as easy to buy illegal guns on the street as some answerers here make it out to be.

But when there is a sensible system of laws-- it's a lot easier to have sensible results. That includes the effect on the unlawful folks-- but, as with all issues of deterrence, it's hard to quantify just how many.

Answer 3

Australia has some of the strictest gun laws in the world, yet Martin Bryant managed to murder thirty-five men, women and children and wound another eighteen in a single rampage.

Gun laws will have little impact. If a mentally unbalanced person wants to act out their violent fantasy, only the method will change. Not the result.

Change the laws relating to reporting of early childhood anti-social behavior and maybe we'll get somewhere.

Answer 4

They can help prevent people who are already known (by someone) to possibly be unstable from purchasing guns. Someone who has a history of suicidal or homicidal thoughts would not be a good fit to purchase a gun (access to guns is the number one predictor or warning sign to someone actually acting on these threats). The idea is that the laws can help. Who's to say that the Vtech massacre wouldn't have happened if he was unable to purchase the guns, but at least it would have taken him a lot longer to access the guns and maybe by then someone would have picked up on his plans and taken him a lot more seriously. The laws certainly aren't the answer - just a place to start.

Answer 5

I see what you're saying.

I know that most gun laws will not stop people from abusing guns, true. If they want a gun, they'll get a gun, legally or not.

However, they do limit a person's power to legally buy a gun, and if they get caught with an illegal gun, they can be charged.

So, they do have some effects, and are there for good purposes.

Good point however.

Answer 6

Gun laws are for people to "legally" own a gun and obey the laws that claim their right in having one.


The other own guns "illegally" that's what the difference that defines the "abuse"

Answer 7

Very good point, and yes, the drug dealer and drug users will continue to get it, the criminal will get a gun, regardless, so more gun control is wrong, why should we be left not to be able to defend our self, but then that is the point of more gun control, we want be able to defend our self against anything including terrorist and government that wants us disarmed , to make it a easy take over for them.

Answer 8

there have been gun laws since this country was founded and to date the criminals have always found a way to get the guns therefore the laws imposed are directed towards law abiding citizens who use guns properly. the laws make it more difficult for these citizens to purchase and posess firearms whereas the criminals can merely walk to a seedy section of anytown, usa and obtain a firearm from other criminals.

Answer 9

Contrary to popular opinion, drug laws aren't meant to stop people from abusing drugs. Most laws that involve behavior aren't meant to stop the behavior, but simply punish it.

Answer 10

nicely gee it worked on alcohol for the period of prohibition and it truly works for DUI drivers and % limits are not in any respect damaged and so what if over three hundred,000 of our childrens die as an instantaneous effect of alcohol or drug abuse on a each and each year foundation, the attorneys and rehabs are making billions and per chance some will trickle right down to us and if no longer lets make a regulation for that too.