What do you think about banning firearms altogether?

Question

I've heard people say that if we get rid of all the guns, then we are only setting ourselves up for crime because if a criminal wants to get a gun and kill or rob then he will.

But how do you explain the success rates of countries like Australia and Japan, who have banned all guns and their crime rates have gone down?

Answer 1

I'm against it.

As for explaining crime in Australia and Japan, I'd say check your sources. GUN-crime may have gone down, but Australia's crime rate has not changed very much one way or the other, and just a week or so ago, there was a story about a Japanese mayor who was killed with a gun.

Here's a hypothetical situation. Suppose you are asleep at your home with your family late one evening. You hear a glass shatter in the living room, immediately followed by the sounds of several heavy footsteps, intimating that there are two or more intruders. Obviously, at this moment you have no idea what their intent is (other than that it is of a criminal nature); they could simply be looking to steal your belongings, or they could be bent on more violent ends. Even with a home alarm system, a great deal of harm can be done before the police arrive.

Now, in an unarmed society, these intruders will still avail themselves of some form of weapons (crowbars, baseball bats, long knives, etc.); and if you and/or your spouse arm yourself(es) with similar improvised weapons (golf clubs, softball bats, collectible swords, etc.), then who do you think will win this encounter? What if you are suddenly outnumbered by four or five assailants? Think of the Manson family massacre.

Conversely, in an armed society, a homeowner who is also a skilled, responsible, and knowledgable gun-owner is much more likely to keep the home and family safe.

However, all this aside, the 2nd Amendment was not meant as a means of crime-control. It was intended to protect the rights of the individual from a tyrannical government. Now, if the government suddenly decides it wants to disarm its populace, what could its ultimate motive be? "The common good" does not strike me as a viable answer.

Answer 2

Unsure of the stigma that everyone has to rid our country of gun ownership, I offer this: There are people that want gun ownership, it is their right to own as much as it is the right not to own if you so choose. That is FREEDOM! There are sufficient safeguards in place to prevent those that do not qualify from having them. They are very strict and cover all of the important areas and are very well thought out. The control is in place for safety. Taking away the right to firearms will only prevent law abiding citizens from owning them. Even if there were a way, the criminal element is not going to give theirs up. It is a given. The lobby for taking the firearms is a facade. It is part of the surgically precise stripping away of rights by legislators based on events or popular opinion in the emotion of the moment. Think: Gun Control became the hot item for political position as the V Tech happened and unfortunately, while the circumstances are pronounced as adequate for stirring up anti gun enthusiasts, the real reason behind the tragedy was that the system failed and allowed that young man to have a firearm. Funny, if the legislators were really concerned about the dangers, would it not make sense to fixing the broken part to prevent unecessary killing and allowing the rights to be as they are instead of lobbying in a political arena for the rights to be taken. Now, What happens to your rights when they are taken? Think about it. When the rights of the constitution are taken away, in essence the constitutuion has been re-written, little bit at a time and when done, all of your constitutional rights are gone. What do you do? You did not see it coming, you do not see it as it happens because of emotion or deceit. What is your recourse when you have no rights? Can you own property? Can you move about freely at any time of day? Are you allowed to participate in voting for officials? What will happen to the current system if there were no rights? Where would you stand and just what value would you give to the system of governing the society you live in. Would you, as a member of that society have a say? Just questions and things to think about but see that it is not just a matter of safety to lose a right. I do not personally believe that the taking of firearms will be the solution to a problem that does not exist. The Australia and Japan serenity that you hear about, just read rss feeds and the same problems are in their society. If you believe all that you hear, then someone will take what you have. Do yourself a favor and before making a judgement look at the system of government that those you describe have in place and match the rights, freedoms and creed to their government to the one we have and if they are comparable I would say that there might be some substance to what you ask provided the police blotters, not the newscasts, reveal a reduction in crime. In the state of Arizona, citizens are allowed to carry guns and concealed weapons. I wonder what their crime rate is as provided by the FBI and other crime indexes. Seems to me that if crime reduction were the issue for legislators surely they have enough integrity to notice the state that has the lowest crime statistics are armed and have a good record people behaving themselves. I have not heard that report yet on the news, yet you can see the crime indexes on the internet. Maybe the legislators cannot use the internet, I do not know. To make up your own mind would be mature and give you good information that you could have conviction about and even a footing for a stance in a debate with someone else.

Answer 3

The wonderful thing about statistics is that you can make them say whatever you want, if you phrase your qualifiers just right. Guns do not cause crime...criminals cause crime.

The neo-nazi skin heads would tell you that if you discounted the crimes committed by blacks, of which Japan and Australia have a relatively small population compared to the US, that the US crime rate is comparable per capita.

NRA members will tell you how many crimes were stopped because of armed citizens.

Mothers Against Drunk Drivers will tell you that more people are killed by drunk drivers than by hand guns.

Believe whatever rhetoric you want and if you believe you should not have the right to own a gun, don't buy one. No one is forcing you to be armed. If you are buying a weapon for home defense and you are not sure that you could look an intruder in the face and pull the trigger, don't buy a gun, it'd be a shame if you were killed with your own gun.

But in closing, do not infringe on the rights of others. If law abiding citizens want to have guns and they own and use them and store them responsibly, let them be. To be perfectly frank, I could care less about crime statistics in Japan, Australia or any other country for that matter. What I am concerned with is my ability to defend my family and my home against intruders and the ability of the American people to form an armed militia should we fall under attack. (Which, by the way is the reason for the second amendment)

Answer 4

I heard that Australia's violent crime rate went up. Japan is a different story, completely different culture and nearly homogeneous in terms of race and language. Great Britain, France, Canada are more likely to be like the USA.

I'm totaly against a gun Ban. Consider the future where we continue to ban the most dangerous thing we do or own.

Answer 5

Hand over your guns and you may as well go ahead and hand over your freedoms. You can kill people with all kinds of things besides guns, but do you really want criminals to be the only ones with guns? They break in and you are going through the house with a bat and they have a gun then who do you think is going to walk out alive? The finger pulls the trigger, the gun doesn't just go off by itself. If criminals are the only ones with guns, then just look at the minds behind the finger...

Answer 6

How do you explain the success rates of countries like Sweeden and Switzerland, who give their citizens guns and train them and their crime rates ARE the lowest in the world?

I'm sorry, 2nd Amendment protects the right of firearms, not only for self-protection, but the founding fathers knew that if a government ever got too strong, this would be one of the few ways people could prevail.

Answer 7

I don't know, how do people explain the success of countries like Switzerland where ownership of a Sig 550 or other military assault rifle is mandatory for all men 18-36. Conservative estimates place the gun ownership rate at one firearm for every 5 citizens, liberal estimates place it at 1 for every 2. They have bullet control which is something we are sorely lacking.

Why would a criminal, who is willing to murder or commit armed robbery, be deterred by a lesser law banning firearms?

Answer 8

You must be a liberal? OK Prime example England, Guns are almost completely illegal. Even the Police didn't carry guns 20 years ago, until the criminals started getting guns and using them in crimes. Now guess who has to have guns? The Police.

Answer 9

Uh excuse me you are wrong and need to get your facts straight the crime rate went up in Austrailia also there are places in the U.K. that has tried similar things and have seen an increase in crimes commited with guns you take the guns away it will only be the law-abiding citizens who will turn in their weapons the criminals will not it has been proven

Answer 10

You can never separate Americans from their guns. Think of the way we won our independence, how our forefathers relied on guns for food, freedom and protection. Think of the role models kids grow up having. Guys like John Wayne or anyone in the Godfather always had their guns, and they used them to provide food, freedom, and protection. From the moment we are all born we are constantly exposed to this. Millions of people in this country own guns and love them, how could you take them away? Those who hunt or shoot for sport would definitely never let you. People in other countries did not grow up with guns like the average American does, so not owning a gun is more likely to be OK with them.