More Guns = More Violence?

Question

The claim that armed citizens deter homicidal assaults contends with the claim that more guns escalate a domestic arms race. There is evidence on both sides.

However, is it safe to assume that more guns equal more violence? In the same way, say, that more waffle makers equal more waffles? Surely intent plays a role (that is, how a user plans to use a gun), but I'm wondering if the mere presence of guns can escalate a potentially violent scenario. And is there a difference between and ? Is so, what is it?

No real agenda here. I am simply trying to sort through the logic involved.

Please aim for a reasoned, logical answer: no rants or pro-gun/anti-gun tirades.

Please also note that the question does not ask whether more guns equals more or less crime. That is not the question. I am simply asking whether is a logical assumption or not.

Answer 1

Another logical assumption could actually be more guns = less violence. If you knew for a fact that another person may be armed, that could decrease the likelyhood of an altercation because the ultimate outcome could be getting shot versus getting into a fistfight. Also, re-introducing laws to allow duelling could be a good way to insure proper etiquette in public. Just a thought.

Answer 2

Its a mixed bag and very complex issue..

Guns in the wrong hands could escalate what could have been a less violent situation.

The presence of guns can deter a violent situation if carried and used properly.

A domestic violence situation could worsen due to the presence of a gun.

The multitude of situations for and against are too many and to reason either way is mute as THE HUMAN FACTOR IS TOO VARIABLE to predict a reasonable outcome either way.

Violence is usually associated with some type of crime, so they are interrelated.

Violent behavior, its reasons, motives and outcomes will continue to exist despite the absence or presence of guns.

Asking that more guns=more violence is not a logical assumption.

Answer 3

I don't think this is a simple question.

Given the population today, I would have to say that it is a true statement as people are still undereducated. I think undereducated people are more likely to pull the trigger causing more violence. (Bush/Cheney are examples)

I think people that are emotional are more likely to pull the trigger.

But I don't know if any of this would come into play here.
As this sentence stands, as simple as it is, I would have to say that no, just because there are more guns does not automatically mean that there will be more violence. However, I think it is likely that it will depend upon the people and society.

Look at the Middle East. Don't all of the people there carry guns and they have been fighting badly for years and years.

I like the argument that if everyone is carrying then you will have less violence because everyone knows it. I thought of that myself but not everyone does so...

Answer 4

I just want you to understand what you have to do/prove in texas to carry a concealed handgun. You cannot have any felonies in your lifetime. You can't have a class a misdemeanor (PI, MIP, fighting) in the past 7 years. You have give your fingerprints to both the state and the FBI, where they compared it to a database of criminals. Any smart person knows that this means you cannot commit a crime and leave prints, because they will immediately know who you are. Once you get your license youre liability goes way up. If you take it the wrong place, expose it innapropriately, or break any of the requirements previously mentioned, you face substantial ($10,000 and up) fines and you lose your license. When you buy a gun, you first pass another background check before registering the gun serial number with your state. Each gun ships with a bullet casing that was fire at the factory and is given to the state upon purchase. This allows them to immediately identify the gun if it is used in a crime. All these restrictions are placed on a citizen if he or she chooses to exercise his or her 2nd amendment.
I hope this shows you how much regulation is involved in aquiring a gun legally. You can't do much more unless you ban firearms altogether. In this case only criminals would own guns. If you think that guns and gun violence would dissappear with less legal ownership, just look at how easy it is to get a dimebag of weed. If there is demand for something, it will find a way to get into the system. anyone who goes thru the proper channels will know that they cannot get away with a crime. They are also probably not the same sector of society that gets in drunken bar fights or engages in violence over road rage. I have never committed a crime or been arrested. I have the right, under the US constitution, to arm myself and have the ability to fight back if threatened. You will probably never flip your car or fall out of a ski boat, but you still buckle your seat belt and wear your life jacket just in case. In texas the CHL law was enacted after a crazy gun man crashed his car into a cafeteria and began to randomly murder people. One woman lost both of her elderly parents. She just so happend to carry a gun, but had left it in the car in respect for the law. She fought very hard for legislation, and it passed. In your usage, less guns means more govt regulation.I do not think that more govt regs = less violence, because the violence is committed by people who ignore govt regulations to begin with. As far as people snapping and using a readily availabe handgun, i dont think this happens as often as anti-gun folks would like to think. Besides, if you want someone dead you can use a car, a lead pipe, a bow, a brick or any other method imaginable. If your sick twisted mindframe includes taking a life, I dont think that govt regulations on legal gun ownership is going to prevent you from murdering someone.

Answer 5

No.........

The short answer to this question is in the crime stats themselves.

In the US, the areas with the most strict gun laws, NYC, Chicago and such, have the highest gun violence in the nation. It is basically illegal to own a gun there and Murder and other gun related violence is through the roof.

And then look states with little or no gun laws (take Vermont or Maine for example). Just about every non-felon in those states own guns. They have the least amount of gun violence in the country.

Why?

Its not about the amount of guns in the hands of people... Its about the moral values of those owning the guns.

Answer 6

See the link... John Lott has studied this quite a while...
waffle makers = more waffles ? Only if more gun makers were out there; there are FEWER manufacturers now than in the past.
My certified Personal Opinion is that there will always be a certain amount of violence,expressed in many ways.

Answer 7

Speaking only about my personal experience...

I target shoot once a week as a hobby, to exercise mental discipline, and because, some may find this strange, but I find it relaxing.

In the past year I've bought a new pistol and rifle. I do not feel anymore violent today than I did a year ago and violence has not appreciably increased around my neighborhood.

Answer 8

Prior to the encouraged to be armed citizen in Israel terrorist attacks typically involved mass shootings. When the attackers started getting shot down by John Q. before they could get a shock worthy body count, bombs and suicide bombers came into fashion. So choose your poison I guess.

I'm pretty sure armed faculty at schools would change the tactics of these little defective scumbag school shooters. Anything that gets those little cowards a jumpstart on rotting in hell is ok with me.

Answer 9

LOGICA *** DICTUS= LOGIC DOES NOT DICTATE

TO LOGICALLY ASSUME THAT CRIME WILL ESCALATE IS BEYOND RATIONAL THOUGHT.

IF YOU DID NOT HAVE A GUN AND WERE STOPPED IN AN ALLEY BY SOMEONE TO BE ROBBED YOU WOULD GET ROBBED.
IF YOU HAD A WEAPON THEN YOU COULD DEFEND YOUR SELF.

SO YES MORE VIOL ENC WOULD BE EMPLOYED BUT IF YOU KILL THEM THEN IN THE STATISTICAL LONG RUN LESS BECAUSE WE HAVE WEEDED OUT THE BAD GUYS(PERPETRATORS).

Answer 10

More guns = more scared crooks as they already have em, they are scared we all will soon too!
Scare a crook, own a Gun !
Then take your son to the local range and have fun like your ancestors did.