Explain to me why...?

Question

If the argument for ownership of firearms is for protection against the criminals who own guns, then why is the crime and violence much lower in certain countries (say Japan or England), where gun owernship is highly restricted? If restricting or criminalizing gun ownership supposedly will only help the criminals, why don't criminals in Japan or England take advantage of the strict gun laws, get themselves some guys and start creating chaos?

Answer 1

I think you should go back and do a little research. England and Japan are having some very real problems with violence as of late. But I digress.

You cannot compare life in countries that are smaller than most states to life in America. There are also countries where almost everyone is armed and there is little or no violent crime.

You also may want to look at states and cities that have the strictest gun control laws and compare them to the states and cites that have right to carry. Which has the highest murder, robbery and violent crime rates?

.

Answer 2

What Jacob said is correct. England has a much higher rate of violent crime than America and japans is getting there.
The best part of the whole mess is that England has much less freedom than the US and Japan is practically a police state.

You need to compare apples to apples when looking at crime rates. You can not compare countries that have no basic right to privacy, property or free speech, I.E. Japan, and England. And expect that a country with those freedoms to act the same.

You should also look at the numbers of crimes that are averted each year by the simple brandishing of a gun, which according to Professor Gleck is somewhere in the neighborhood of 2 MILLION per year.

Also, and most importantly. Your assumption that the constitution protects my right to own a gun only for protection from other citizens is false. The reason was first and foremost to protect Liberty from GOVERNMENT.

Answer 3

The argument for gun ownership is not for protection of our homes from criminal. It is over the bill of rights which gives every citizen who is not a felon to own and bear arms. This is one of our most basic, rights, responsibilties, and privelages. I don't blame crime on guns either. If criminals were truly prosecuted according to the severity of their crimes and our legal system was not taxed to capacity and beyond I think things would be much better

Answer 4

I can't speak for the two countries that you mentioned, but I think the Bobbys in england just started carrying guns within the past twenty years or so. I could be wrong, but I think gun violence there is getting much worse. I think it should be my right to carry a gun, to protect myself. I actually work in some areas that have the highest crime rates in my state. Don't you think I should be allowed the opportunity to even the playing field? Or should I just give up my wallet and car keys, and get shot in the head anyway?

Answer 5

I don't know, but it really doesn't matter. If we put more restrictions on guns here, it's highly probable that only law-abiding citizens will abide by the gun laws and criminals will not. Some criminals in Japan and English probably do just what you said.

Answer 6

I needa gun in my house to protect my family
Police is always there when somebody already d. or stolen.

Is my Individual decision,
Individual decision always be bettter than a state decision to restricted people rigths..............to have or not have...............or use or not ............

you can kill with no guns.....................
State can not give you the rigth protection, and they point out some false regulation....................

Answer 7

You have been mislead

http://www.gunblast.com/Gun_Facts.htm
http://www.gunsandammomag.com/second_amendment/rk0405/