Why do you believe that?
2007-12-25 15:57:25 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
Why do you believe it will or won't?
2007-12-25 16:05:01 · update #1
Just letting criminals have guns will not reduce crime.
2007-12-25 16:03:47 · answer #1 · answered by trooper3316 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋
A ban on guns will have to first be preceded by gun removal. That's a bee-hive all its own. Beside the point though.
Gun ban will reduce car-jackings, muggings, armed robbery, and other crimes where threat of lethal violence is more important to its success than actual use of lethal force.
Crimes where killing is the sole purpose will not change. Homicide rates will go down because we'll have less-lethal attacks which means more survivors. Attempted Homicide rates will rise for the same reason. This is a shift rather than a real change.
We will see an increase in smuggling of guns. Wherever there is a ban, there will be a black market.
2007-12-26 00:10:59 · answer #2 · answered by Sithlord78 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It wouldn't, then only the criminals and the liberals would have the power. Trust me, the next step after the liberals get our guns will be all kinds of rights taken away and re-education camps like their communist brothers have done in every country they took over.
Why don't you "new communists" (liberals) stop sniveling about lawful ownership or guns and the rights of criminals over victims and move the hell out of the U.S.A. to a wonderful utopian communist country of your choice where private ownership of guns is against the law.
I have a wonderful experiment that you liberals/marxists could do to prove gun ownership by law abiding citizens is wrong and only causes crime. You ALL should make up a sign and plant it in your yard where everyone could see it, declaring _THERE ARE NO GUNS IN THIS HOUSE_ . Then all you anti-gun liberals could be safe from gun crime because none of your "they have rights and are only mis-understood" felons would ever think of robbing unarmed people.
According to your logic they would leave your home alone and only cause crime against people with guns in their homes. My bet is threre would be a crime wave at homes of liberals with signs in their front yard, because breaking into peoples home that are armed may not be so attractive as you candyasses that have signs. But then again, I don't think that felons are mis-understood nor nice people.
2007-12-26 01:36:06 · answer #3 · answered by G T 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Even banning guns, the crime won't reduce, maybe slightly, but believe me, they'll find a way to get guns
2007-12-26 01:29:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yea, I think a total gun ban would reduce the number of gun-related crimes. Although we might see a sharp rise in the number of stabbings.
Look, there will always be people who are determined to harm somebody and there's no way you can stop them. But with the total gun ban, you can change the way they do it. Imagine how those crazy nuts from the Virginia Tech and the Columbine shootings would be able to pull off a massacre with butcher knives. Could they still kill somebody? Sure. But they wouldn't be able to kill that many. And would their denial of access to guns be guaranteed with a total gun ban? Of course not, but there's a better chance that they won't get their hands on them.
Also, with fewer guns on the market, especially black market guns with the serial numbers rubbed off, the lack of supply would cause a sharp rise in demand as well as an increase in its price. This means that your everyday gangster wannabe might not be able to afford a gun. Therefore, only the bigger drug movers will be able to afford guns, and maybe this will make these drug dealers easier to track down.
There are advantages to a total gun ban. A lot of innocent bystanders are killed by guns. Then again, some people ignore the practicality of the issue and only look to their own ideology in regard to gun owernership rights in America. I think if the history and founding of this country has taught us anything, it is that practicality and the triumph of reason and common sense over ideology is what makes this country great.
2007-12-26 00:19:10 · answer #5 · answered by ctown 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Banning guns only assures criminals, law-abiding citizens do not have them for protection! It should be mandatory law-abiding citizens take gun safety courses, possess a gun and those with prior military service with other weaponry be granted access after background investigations as terrorists want the US citizens striped of their rights to bear arms! Unarmed citizens are defenseless against terrorism and criminals and that is exactly what criminals want! Criminals will possess weapons no matter how severe the penalties are as they do not abide by or uphold any laws, under any circumstances! Dis-arming America is not the answer....its a tragedy in the making and its clearly anti-US Constitutional! Criminals will always have guns...it is impossible to get them all....the world is full of firearms that can gain access into America. Did the US laws stop the drugs from coming in? Hell, No...there again it is not going to happen! America should not disarm law-abing citizens, but encourage gun safety courses and weapons for protection against those who run amuck with our society and kill people! A shooter will not get very far or kill very many people when the public is well armed and certified on how to properly use and discharge a firearm, when needed for protection! Killers know this much....you cannot snow...the snowman! When others possess firearms as well as the criminal...he thinks twice about pulling his weapon as there is more than a good chance....he will be shot multiple times, by multiple people from multiply angles and miltiple places! Basically, the criminal would be on a suicide mission, should he pull a weapon in the company of well-armed and trained in gun use and safety among law-abiding citizens!
2007-12-26 00:32:12 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
well seeing that its a constitutional right ... its not going to happen. but most crooks don't legally have or possess guns anyway ...they obtain them by illegal means. a ban would only effect the law abiding citizens which would place society at greater risk of harm because they would not be able to protect themselves. the law should be that everyone should have a gun. who is going to have a crime spree knowing that everyone has a gun and risk getting shot.
2007-12-26 06:09:45 · answer #7 · answered by ROBERT G 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
no, i believe it would never be effected because of a very simple reason. first, there are just to many guns to confiscate, there are literally more guns than there are automobiles! its just like when they banned alchohol, there was so many bars and so much of it people just kept doing it. think about it, just because some old fart(president) in the white house signs his name on a piece of paper doesn't bring peace and prosper to the earth. it would be impossible to go to every single person and force them to give their guns. and acutally, this could cause a war, because people would defend their guns, and the people who want to destroy them could never abolish one another. this is acutally no differnt than suddenly making tobacco an illegal drug. imagine how many people would be doomed because they cant quit smoking?
i also believe that without guns, there would be too many people because the birth rate would go through the roof.
2007-12-26 01:45:20 · answer #8 · answered by Zetsu 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Okay, let's first have a reality check. Criminals do not get their guns through legal channels. Therefore, banning guns will do nothing to curb their access to them. Remember this...
"If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."
Stripping honest, law-abiding citizens of their right to gun ownership would do nothing to abate the possession of illegal guns by law-breakers, and would probably only serve to multiply the number of unregistered guns out there. Gun registration and stricter enforcement of this tool is the most effective method of gun control, because it does not create criminality by stripping us of long-standing constitutional rights.
If you don't believe me, go to your local police station and ask the evidence custodian to educate you on how many of the guns in evidence are legally registered weapons. My experience and years of observation have shown me that the number will be unbelieveably low.
2007-12-26 09:09:57 · answer #9 · answered by looneycop 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It won't.
Because it goes under the foolish assumption that criminals will follow the law as do the law abiding.
And registration isn't the answer either. All due respect to the other Officer who brought this up, what criminal is going to make sure any guns he owns are "Registered" and traceable to him?
2007-12-26 12:59:46 · answer #10 · answered by mebe1042 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋