Why illegalizing guns will not work in the U.S

[Imper1um]

The problem is...banning guns doesn't solve the fact that people can get guns illegally...regardless of where they are.

Banning things simply makes the Black Market grow. I would love it if Marijuana was legalized and regulated...then perhaps we can apply it to our failing economy.

 

[MASTACHIEFPWN]

You talk about removing guns from private owners like it'd be impossible- I present to you this. Give them insintive- Give them a chance to turn them in for money, any that don't have their's taken away by force, preferably by the Military. What are they going to do? Shoot the soldiers at their door who are armed to the teeth?

Actually the whole Revolution kind of started in Lexington, MA when a bunch of British soldiers showed to take away the colonists guns so yeah you do shoot the soldier who shows up at your door. If the American soldier was so superior why is Vietnam not the 51st state?

What is an untrained civilian popolous going to do against a fucking TANK
Most people in the US are reasoned enough to give up something at gun point.

 

[tangoprime]

Here's what you do, if you don't want to be shot, or killed or get rob. Stay the FUCK AWAY from any area with a high population of Blacks, and Hispanics. If you have to be in an area with a high population density of blacks and Hispanics, avoid their neighborhoods. If that doesn't work, and you have to live there, exercise you 2nd Amendment right, police response time is astronomically bad. Don't go to gun free zones, they attract lunatics who for some reasons will go on a mass shooting spree. Congrats, you have now lessening your chances of being shot.

Not sure if trolling or just racist... most of these shooters are white males.

Spoiler: Twilight shooter

Spoiler: Dark Knight Rises shooter

Connecticut school shooting
(didn't see a good image but it's a white guy)

Are you serious? This is running joke at this point. Most of the mass shooter were white in a gun free zone. Most of the crimes committed in America can be attributed to blacks and Hispanics following suit. Detroit would like a word with you. I'm not even racist, I stated facts, if you don't want to be shot, avoid those areas like a plague.

I mean you know there's a problem when the Dark Knight shooter droved to a gun free zone, compared to the CCW that was closer to where he lived. In fact CCW states, tends to have lesser crime than those who have gun control areas, not that anyone cares. It wouldn't fit the narrative, for gun control even though CT was rank 5th in gun control.

Quoted for honesty. Also, everyone always loves to bring out the "gun deaths" chart and point around at which states have more shootings and which ones have gun laws... what they need to be looking at is a chart of crime in general vs. gun control laws. When I lived in Baltimore, where there was no realistic way to obtain CCW (at the time), you had to be constantly afraid for your life after dark, hell before dark depending on where you were (*cough EAST BALTIMORE *cough*), my neighbor got mugged at knifepoint right on her front steps twice. Since I moved to Houston, I live in a neighborhood where we all leave our garages open etc. and all at least once every week or so there's a story on the local news about some junkie asshole trying to rob a store, or break into a house for a B&E or home invasion, and catching a bullet from a prepared homeowner or storeowner, who would otherwise be one of those statistics that the pro-gun control people DON'T bring into the argument. So I'll gladly be in one of the less restrictive on gun control states on the map with higher than average shooting deaths, if the only shooting deaths I seem to be seeing reported are criminals.

Making guns illegal DOES NOT STOP CRIME. It may reduce shootings, but it causes more crime to happen, as criminals no longer have a MORTAL FEAR of committing crime. Australia is a commonly brought up example of a gun ban. THEIR VIOLENT CRIME WENT UP 42.2%, including a 29.9% increase in Rape, and a 49.2% increase in assault, in the 5 years following the ban. ...I'm not down with that, I'll keep my SIG on my hip, thank you very much.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17847

 

[tangoprime]

Nevermind the fact that the murder rate in the UK has been skyrocketing ever since. Nevermind the fact that study after study shows that gun control has no meaningful impact on crime rates.

The Statistical News Release Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2010/11: Supplementary Volume 2 to Crime in England and Wales 2010/11
In 2012 the Home Office reported that, "in 2010/11, firearms were involved in 11,227 recorded offences in England and Wales, the seventh consecutive annual fall".

Wikipedia then notes that "Firearms statistics in England and Wales include airguns and imitations guns, which make up a high proportion of these recorded offences" Which is correct (4000 of those offences were air-guns) So the UK's gun crime has been falling after the increased restrictions, on gun control, consecutively, for years.

Nevermind the fact that 3 of the 4 deadliest elementary school shootings took place in the UK or Germany.

Maybe so, but America clearly has a huge problem with school shootings not present anywhere else in the world. This year (2012) America had 6 incidents of guns being used in school (mainly only as a weapon of suicide) and one with a knife. The rest of the world have had one incident this year. Just look at the sheer distribution of school shootings in the Wikipedia article about it: America get their own separate page to list their shootings, which dwarves the lists of the other continents. There is a big problem in the US, and it seems to be getting worse.

Nevermind the fact that you might actually be able to stop these mass shootings and even reduce the overall crime rate by improving the US mental health system beyond it's current, incomprehensibly in-effective state, nevermind all these facts and just go with the knee-jerk reaction of banning guns and watch things get even worse than they were in the early 90's.

Oh I agree completely. The most common cause of death by white males aged 28-30 is suicide. Clearly something is seriously wrong with the way our society is treating mental health issues, this is a huge problem, and one that I would say is very much a main cause of these school shootings. A better infrastructure of mental care must be created for people, and this is perhaps more needed than gun control because it is such a widespread problem that will, if it is successful, do a lot to help reduce school shootings, but I also think it would be very much worthwhile to reduce the ease with which guns can be obtained by people.

Oh really?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre
Also, don't even talk about the "huge amount of death caused by accidental discharge of guns every year in the US." That is a lie. Only a few hundred people a year die in the US because of accidents involving guns, and that includes mis-fires and drunk hunters shooting their hunting buddies. More people accidentally poison themselves than die from an accidental discharge. The idea that guns are these dangerous things that will just decide to fire on their own is a lie, that has been told to you by the anti-gun community to scare you over to their side.

According to this website: http://mortality-rates.findthedata.org/l/14990/Accidental-discharge-of-firearms It averages at 747 people per year killed by accidental misfire, which is no small amount.
This Wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
Includes accidental deaths, with a population average death rate thingymibob, to average everyone's out for comparison. The US had 0.27 accidental discharge deaths per thousand, (11th from top overall) the U.K had 0.1. (11th from bottom overall) That IS a big difference, in fact there is a huge difference in every figure.

Australia had a huge gun culture, much like the US's, until a terrible mass shooting there, this article explains it better than I could: http://world.time.com/2012/12/17/when-massacres-force-change-lessons-from-the-u-k-and-australia/?iid=gs-main-lead.
If you look back at the wiki chart, you'll see Australia a good 3/4 of the way down the chart, with very little gun crime and related deaths compared to America, and no Mass shootings since, so it can happen in a very pro-gun area. No other first world country has as much gun related crime or death as America, no other country has as many school shootings, there is a reason for that, and a solution, yes it requires not just a change of law on weapons, but a change of attitude as well, and an addressing of the issues of why young American males are taking their own lives and the lives of others in these 'events', but it'll take all those things to properly make an impact on these horrific incidents.

You're rate of gun crime might be decreasing, but your murder rate skyrocketed after the law was put in place.

America has a problem with violence in general, our murder rate is several times higher than any other modern nation excluding Russia, you can't compare us to any other nation and draw a meaningful conclusion, we're too much of an outlier.

It seems like reducing gun availability would help, but the studies just don't support that.

Your math is wrong, we have a .0025 rate of deaths due to accidental discharge per 1000 people, and that's based on the 747 number that you provided. Your second site must be inaccurate for some reason or another, our rate of deaths to accidental discharge is low. 747 sounds like a high number until you realize our population is 300 million, far above the population of any European nation.

Ausralia did not have a massive gun culture like the US, no nation does or ever did. We have more guns than people in this nation, no other nation was ever even close. Besides, our nation was found by guns, with gun rights as an inherent given, that is different than any other nation except maybe Switzerland, but they have a much more militarized, as opposed to individualized gun ownership.

You have to understand, you are taking statistics out of nowhere and trying to draw conclusions from them, that's bad science. The studies do not support a positive correlation between gun availability and crime. Hell, the 9 nations in Europe with the lowest gun ownership, have a murder rate 3 times higher than the 9 nations with the highest gun ownership. There is obviously more at work than just "more guns = more crime". The problem is our mental health, criminal, and drug enforcement systems, not our guns.

As stated in my post above, but here's the support for your claim just for future reference: http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17847

5 Years after Oz banned their guns, theirs and the murder rates in the US fell at the same rate, though their violent crime went up 42.2%. Why? Because criminals no longer had as much fear in committing crimes. I enjoy living in a place where the criminals have to consider the fact that there's a good chance they'll be killed by their intended victims, rather than the other way around.

 

[LarenzoAOG]

It's too late to fix it by simply taking the guns away; there's simply too many guns in the states. Although, if it were feasible to just magically erase all civilian and illegal guns (leaving only the police and military) I'd say "yes! do it for Christ's sake!".

But unfortunately that's not possible, and America is just left with one very large, virtually unsolvable gun crime problem.

The problem is actually quite solvable, but apparently in the U.S. treating the mentally ill for free and providing every child with a good education so they don't end up in street gangs is simply not worth the hundreds or thousands of love lost to gun violence every year.

The problem has never been guns, but a complete buttfucking of priorities.

Never watched Gangland, associated with people who are/were/know people in a gang, or been to an inner city school, have you?

Most of the people in there aren't there because they lack educational opportunities, I went to the same school as people in gangs. Some of the people in my own program were in gangs. They're in street gangs because they want to be. Because the opportunities in the gang are seductive. They're in gangs because gangs say they stick together.

You can work your ass off to try and get a good education and hope to get a good job, to maybe make a lot of money. Or you can sell drugs, and make ten grand in a day (know, I don't know if you can actually make that much in a day or not).

If you're a ten year who grew in an area saturated with gangs, and see these gang bangers with all these nice things, which are you going to choose? To top it all off, once you're in, it's very hard to get out with out getting killed.

One of the major contributing factors to gangs is the fact that you grow up in a poor area with shit schools, I've also never been in a gang, only ever knew one person person who was and it wasn't that major, but when you grow up in a poor neighborhood and don't receive the education you need you have two options, you take a shitty job making pennies and you try to get a better education or job, or you end up doing something illegal.

Especially in the United States, where there are very noticeable gaps between poorer minority neighborhoods and richer neighborhoods, you end up with shitty schools in barrios and ghettos, they produce tons of drop outs, and those that do graduate aren't anywhere near the level they have to be to get a secondary education, which you more or less need to have a good standard of living nowadays, so they end up turning toward illegal activities.

The allure of gang life is a big problem of course, making tons of money, working your own hours, all that jazz, but it's not the major overarching problem. When you take a look at a street gang you're not going to find a ton of college bound valedictorians, you're gonna find drop outs who couldn't even get a job at McDonald's.

 

[sunder202]

You talk about removing guns from private owners like it'd be impossible- I present to you this. Give them insintive- Give them a chance to turn them in for money, any that don't have their's taken away by force, preferably by the Military. What are they going to do? Shoot the soldiers at their door who are armed to the teeth?

Actually the whole Revolution kind of started in Lexington, MA when a bunch of British soldiers showed to take away the colonists guns so yeah you do shoot the soldier who shows up at your door. If the American soldier was so superior why is Vietnam not the 51st state?

What is an untrained civilian popolous going to do against a fucking TANK
Most people in the US are reasoned enough to give up something at gun point.

I wont be handing over my fire arms at gun point or tank point. Am i willing to die for it? you bet ya, because its not about the gun its about what it represents, the freedom to protect myself and my family from any threat be it home invaision or an oppressive government as well as liberty as a whole. If freedom isnt worth dying for then nothing is.

Also ill throw in Ben Franklin quote- They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

 

[ninjaRiv]

America hasn't tried banning guns and committing to it, have they? Seems to me that nothing else has worked so far. Could be worth a try.

 

[Faraja]

Because outlawing drugs like meth and MJ has obviously worked so well in America.

Don't start comparing guns to other illegal substances, because they are not the same and shouldn't be treated as such. How many people have the ability to grow guns in their closet? Get back to me when a psycho can slaughter 28 people with a dime-bag of weed.

How many gun crimes are committed everywhere in relation to drugs? I'd like to know how many robberies/muggings are committed so the perpetrator can get money for drugs. Or how many people are shot over turf to sell narcotics.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

With all the talk of guns and shootings recently I've read allot of posts from users oversees that suggest we simply make guns illegal in the U.S. The problem is it just wont work, guns have become an enormous part of america's culture and are apart of the nation's heritage/identity. I don't identify with the subculture that is obsessed with guns but I know people who are and if guns were made illegal there would be very large, very dangerous, armed riots all over the country.

Secondly there are huge, powerful lobbying groups that spend billions to maintain influence in Washington and they will not see the day when guns become illegal.

See, I understand where you're coming from, and I personally don't think that guns should be fully illegal (there are some very good middle-of-the-road options, like making guns as difficult to get as a driver's license (cars kill people, so you need to take a test and own a license - guns also kill people, hence same regulations)), but I find the argument you presented above to be very lazy and feel that it goes against our better nature.

You know what else was part of the nation's heritage/identity, had powerful lobbying groups, and caused a 'very large, very dangerous armed riot' when it was made illegal?

Slavery.

Did that mean it wouldn't work or wasn't worth doing? No. No it didn't.

And no, I'm not actually comparing gun control to slavery - I'm comparing your reasons why gun illegalization wouldn't work to the arguments why abolishing slavery wouldn't work.

One of the things that makes America great is the tradition of destroying old, outdated traditions and forging a new future that no one else dares to dream. Many conservatives forget this - that this nation was founded on Changing the world rather than doing what had always been done. If we liked doing that, we'd have stayed in Europe.

 

[Henkie36]

Well, there is a line in Shoot 'Em Up which I think is just brilliant:
Hertz: He swore to protect our right...
Smith: To go deer-hunting with an Uzi.
And that's the point: why would anyone need fully automatic high caliber assault rifles? (And yes, I know an Uzi is not one, but you get the point) Those things are made for the military, the police forces at a cusp, but a normal person does not need one. Down here in The Netherlands, gun control is very strict, guns are only available for hunting and guess what? We hardly have any nutjobs who shoot holes in schoolchildren.

 

[Faraja]

It's too late to fix it by simply taking the guns away; there's simply too many guns in the states. Although, if it were feasible to just magically erase all civilian and illegal guns (leaving only the police and military) I'd say "yes! do it for Christ's sake!".

But unfortunately that's not possible, and America is just left with one very large, virtually unsolvable gun crime problem.

The problem is actually quite solvable, but apparently in the U.S. treating the mentally ill for free and providing every child with a good education so they don't end up in street gangs is simply not worth the hundreds or thousands of love lost to gun violence every year.

The problem has never been guns, but a complete buttfucking of priorities.

Never watched Gangland, associated with people who are/were/know people in a gang, or been to an inner city school, have you?

Most of the people in there aren't there because they lack educational opportunities, I went to the same school as people in gangs. Some of the people in my own program were in gangs. They're in street gangs because they want to be. Because the opportunities in the gang are seductive. They're in gangs because gangs say they stick together.

You can work your ass off to try and get a good education and hope to get a good job, to maybe make a lot of money. Or you can sell drugs, and make ten grand in a day (know, I don't know if you can actually make that much in a day or not).

If you're a ten year who grew in an area saturated with gangs, and see these gang bangers with all these nice things, which are you going to choose? To top it all off, once you're in, it's very hard to get out with out getting killed.

One of the major contributing factors to gangs is the fact that you grow up in a poor area with shit schools, I've also never been in a gang, only ever knew one person person who was and it wasn't that major, but when you grow up in a poor neighborhood and don't receive the education you need you have two options, you take a shitty job making pennies and you try to get a better education or job, or you end up doing something illegal.

Especially in the United States, where there are very noticeable gaps between poorer minority neighborhoods and richer neighborhoods, you end up with shitty schools in barrios and ghettos, they produce tons of drop outs, and those that do graduate aren't anywhere near the level they have to be to get a secondary education, which you more or less need to have a good standard of living nowadays, so they end up turning toward illegal activities.

The allure of gang life is a big problem of course, making tons of money, working your own hours, all that jazz, but it's not the major overarching problem. When you take a look at a street gang you're not going to find a ton of college bound valedictorians, you're gonna find drop outs who couldn't even get a job at McDonald's.

I don't know how it works in every state, but in Arizona, kids are bused in to schools. Sometimes schools nowhere near where they live. Now, granted, this was a means to try and "desegregate" the schools, but the Tucson Unified School District has actually had to close a number of elementary schools because of it.

There are also a large number of low and no cost charter schools, back to school (as in dropped out, then decided to go back), work-study programs, and free online k-12 education. Somehow, it doesn't seem to be helping. Probably because these people simply don't want to. It's much easier to just sell cocaine and heroin on the streets, then to actually study.

 

[Vegosiux]

I wont be handing over my fire arms at gun point or tank point. Am i willing to die for it? you bet ya, because its not about the gun its about what it represents, the freedom to protect myself and my family from any threat be it home invaision or an oppressive government as well as liberty as a whole. If freedom isnt worth dying for then nothing is.

Would you die for gay rights? Would you die for the free speech of those you despise?

Also ill throw in Ben Franklin quote- They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Apart from the fact that it's not certain Ben actually said that, even if he did, what's "essential" and why? Yes, I know quoting historical giants is profound and the I.W.I.N. button for internet debates, but still.

But in the end anyone who wishes to really protect oneself and one's family will need to think of something more than just "I shoot at things that look at me funny". Say, your wife is getting harassed by her boss at work. You going to shoot the guy?

 

[Brainwreck]

i think we should all just get along and then everything would be okay

 

[LarenzoAOG]

It's too late to fix it by simply taking the guns away; there's simply too many guns in the states. Although, if it were feasible to just magically erase all civilian and illegal guns (leaving only the police and military) I'd say "yes! do it for Christ's sake!".

But unfortunately that's not possible, and America is just left with one very large, virtually unsolvable gun crime problem.

The problem is actually quite solvable, but apparently in the U.S. treating the mentally ill for free and providing every child with a good education so they don't end up in street gangs is simply not worth the hundreds or thousands of love lost to gun violence every year.

The problem has never been guns, but a complete buttfucking of priorities.

Never watched Gangland, associated with people who are/were/know people in a gang, or been to an inner city school, have you?

Most of the people in there aren't there because they lack educational opportunities, I went to the same school as people in gangs. Some of the people in my own program were in gangs. They're in street gangs because they want to be. Because the opportunities in the gang are seductive. They're in gangs because gangs say they stick together.

You can work your ass off to try and get a good education and hope to get a good job, to maybe make a lot of money. Or you can sell drugs, and make ten grand in a day (know, I don't know if you can actually make that much in a day or not).

If you're a ten year who grew in an area saturated with gangs, and see these gang bangers with all these nice things, which are you going to choose? To top it all off, once you're in, it's very hard to get out with out getting killed.

One of the major contributing factors to gangs is the fact that you grow up in a poor area with shit schools, I've also never been in a gang, only ever knew one person person who was and it wasn't that major, but when you grow up in a poor neighborhood and don't receive the education you need you have two options, you take a shitty job making pennies and you try to get a better education or job, or you end up doing something illegal.

Especially in the United States, where there are very noticeable gaps between poorer minority neighborhoods and richer neighborhoods, you end up with shitty schools in barrios and ghettos, they produce tons of drop outs, and those that do graduate aren't anywhere near the level they have to be to get a secondary education, which you more or less need to have a good standard of living nowadays, so they end up turning toward illegal activities.

The allure of gang life is a big problem of course, making tons of money, working your own hours, all that jazz, but it's not the major overarching problem. When you take a look at a street gang you're not going to find a ton of college bound valedictorians, you're gonna find drop outs who couldn't even get a job at McDonald's.

I don't know how it works in every state, but in Arizona, kids are bused in to schools. Sometimes schools nowhere near where they live. Now, granted, this was a means to try and "desegregate" the schools, but the Tucson Unified School District has actually had to close a number of elementary schools because of it.

There are also a large number of low and no cost charter schools, back to school (as in dropped out, then decided to go back), work-study programs, and free online k-12 education. Somehow, it doesn't seem to be helping. Probably because these people simply don't want to. It's much easier to just sell cocaine and heroin on the streets, then to actually study.

The problem with charter schools is that you get in via a lottery, as is the federal law, they can't pick children based on any criteria because it's unfair to most of the children, charter schools also don't denote quality, while the majority of charter schools meet or exceed the standards, some are still pretty shit. A problem with back to school programs is that most have a cutoff age of 21, you can get you're G.E.D. but these days a high school degree is only just good enough for a shitty job in retail or something like that. Online schools do help a lot of people, however some people simply require a teacher and a classroom, also if you live in a low income neighborhood you may or may not be able to afford internet.

I'm by no means an expert, all my knowledge comes from a few university classes, but it's pretty clear that bad neighborhoods with bad schools lead to real problems, you probably don't see street gangs in rich white suburbs, they can make the same money with none of the risk due to the fact that they could afford a better education, not to mention that American public schools are basically designed to fail people who have problems, which is just about everyone in bad schools, if you don't believe me look up "tracking in schools", the short version is that if a student is doing poorly they get the shitty classes and teachers, these are the people that will probably end up doing something illegal for money.

 

[Commissar Sae]

Honestly, I have to say the problem in the states is more one of education, media and mental health policies than gun laws. Yes some guns should be restricted, and a limit on the size of a magazine would not be a bad idea (long guns in Canada are limited to 5 shots, unless they are .22 caliber.) The culture of fear and sensationalism that the media cultivates, backed by the gun culture and the relatively poor support available to lower income families means that these types of crimes are going to remain a problem for the near future.

I wont be handing over my fire arms at gun point or tank point. Am i willing to die for it? you bet ya, because its not about the gun its about what it represents, the freedom to protect myself and my family from any threat be it home invaision or an oppressive government as well as liberty as a whole. If freedom isnt worth dying for then nothing is.

Also ill throw in Ben Franklin quote- They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Americans have already proven that they are willing to give up essential liberty for the illusion of safety. Freedom is an abstract concept at best and so is safety. Ultimately, while I do own a gun, I don't see it as something that is there to defend myself with. The point of it is target shooting and the odd bit of hunting. I'm not afraid of the government or my neighbours, but maybe that's because I am Canadian and we don't have the same kind of paranoia your media seems to cultivate.

Hell there was a school shooting in my city, 1 person died because the police were able to react quickly and the shooter was limited in the kind of weapons he had available, even though his gun was illegally modified (though legally acquired)he was limited in the damage he could do because of the basic regulations and the way the school was organised to deal with just such an event.

 

[drnogood59]

I do not approve of these arguments being started so soon. People are still running on pure emotion and just aren't looking at the facts. Cars and cigarettes both kill more people every year than guns. The U.S. banned cigarettes at one point. It didn't work. People still smoked. The U.S. also banned alcohol at one point. Nobody cared. People kept getting it illegally. Banning guns is never going to work. If people want something bad enough they will get their hands on it, legally or illegally. Just look at illegal drugs. They come up through Mexico. You might as well let law abiding citizens purchase firearms because you know they won't do anything wrong. And linking the idea of guns and insanity is stupid. It's like connecting golf and good manners. Banning certain types of firearms is illogical. Saying that a person will shoot up a school because he has the "bad guy gun"(an "assault weapon") is like saying a guy from a gang will become a good citizen and support the local community center because he is now wearing a three piece suit. Automatic weapons were banned in 1934. Although a U.S. citizen can end up with one legally, it requires a lot of money, time, and paperwork. Criminals will still end up with firearms. The drug cartels will start sending more in from Mexico. And speaking of Mexico, have you seen the blood on the streets in there? The Mexican government is having major problems with gangs and cartels and the U.S. is doing everything short of invading the land to stop it. That crime will just work its way north if guns are banned in the U.S.

 

[Rule Britannia]

Illegalizing guns will stop them from being used. It totally will...it's nothing like trying to illegalize drugs or anything. Once it's illegalized nobody will even consider using a gun for recreational or genuine use.

For those of you that didn't pick up on that I'm being sarcastic


Pretty much my view. Yes, guns are bad.
I like England's system, if you have a gun you get arrested ....there's a lot more knife crime instead though