You're not going to enlighten me, dude. I've read as many stats as you and they're always biased depending on who is reporting them and how they're collected.scrambledeggs said:Strict gun laws are still gun laws.Lord Monocle Von Banworthy said:Felons in the US are already legally prohibited from owning guns. Many of the most violent cities in the US also have the strictest gun laws. Why then isn't the problem already solved?scrambledeggs said:The moral of the story is ban guns altogether, bar if you have a license. Problem solved.Phlopsy said:No shit. That's because criminals acquire guns in order to carry out those serious crimes, and that those in bad areas who are more likely to be targets acquire weapons for protection.scrambledeggs said:People who own a gun are 4 times more likely to be involved in a serious crime.
Protection my balls.
Duh.
Research some statistics about the crime rates per capita in countries with gun restrictions, like Australia, to America, and enlighten yourself.
Apples and oranges, Australians ain't Americans, the Swiss aren't English, etc. You can't break it down that simply. What you aren't going to do is gather up all the guns in America. They have a constitutional prohibition against retroactive laws. As such, you can't ban guns, then declare that everyone who is in possession of a gun is in violation of the ban and therefore subject to confiscation. It violates their highest legal code. Isn't going to happen.
In my current country there are two types of people who have guns. Police and yakuza. I don't really like that, because it means anybody the yak choose to shoot is absolutely guaranteed to be defenseless.
Take the last word, then PM me though if you want to continue. Sorry I derailed the thread by responding.