It may prevent them getting Guns, but what about the ones who already have them? I think we should have stricter gun laws though. And people who gaurs the gun stores maybe. But bad guys can find ways to get them. Buy them off of other people for example.
Stricter gun laws could help good guys, or it could help certain bad guys make money by selling them.
I don't think so. I think it will. There are plenty of laws that were made more strict, yet people continued to disobey. If someone is not law abiding in the first place any extra laws made are not going to impact them in the least. They will impact the people who do abide by the law.
If it were done in an intelligent, commonsense way then yes it would. If we were to treat firearms in the same way we treat cars we could decrease gun violence dramatically. Just as the point system with your drivers license tracks your history to insure you are safe to be on the road, so too could a gun license be used. If someone gets in a fist-fight, beats their spouse, is ordered to attained anger management classes, is diagnosed with a mental issue (depression, etc.) etc.etc. they should have points deducted from their firearms license. In this way we would reduce a lot of gun deaths, but just as people steel cars, drive drunk, text while driving, etc. we would not eliminate gun violence altogether.
8 months ago
Last edited at 3:48PM on 4/1/2013
My sister is actually doing a debate on it, and there are some interesting points. I personally am semi-neutral on the subject. For example, she showed me evidence that when you take away gangs, that most murders are done not with guns, but with knifes, blunt objects like baseball bats, etc. So, if taken away, the murderers will still murder, but the people being murdered won't have any defence against it. But, she also showed me evidence that suicide rates are higher when there is a gun in the household. A gun just seems like an easy way to go, and it's a lot easier to shoot yourself than to stab yourself. People just don't have the guts to go for the knife. But then again, people do cut themselves... maybe we should take knives away instead. O_o (I'll ask my sister if she could give me the link to the evidence, and if I remember, I'll post it under this comment later.)
The bad guys get guns in three primary ways: (1) theft of guns from law abiding citizens who have not taken precautions to secure them properly, (2) gun shows where criminal background checks are not required, and (3) straw purchases from people who were able pass a background check.
In local areas with gun restrictions, guns can be brought in from neighboring jurisdictions with more lax gun restrictions, and therefore such policies are nearly worthless. The larger the area covered by gun restrictions, the more effective they are. It has been shown that the most successful gun violence policy is a national gun policy.
Gun restriction and enforcement targeting the three primary sources listed above will have the best chance of reducing gun violence, particularly when coupled with increased police presence in targeted areas, and private and public programs intended to address the psychological and social issues which lead to gun violence.
Do speeding laws keep people from speeding? Do tax laws keep people from cheating? Do robbery laws stop people from committing robbery? Should we do away with those laws because they don't stop all the "bad guys" from breaking those laws?
No. Places like connecticut with strict gun control laws had a mass shooting, and places like colorado with loose gun laws had a mass shooting, so they're not really making any difference, except for overregulating and limiting our 2nd amendment rights.
Stricter guns laws will only decrease the ability of law abiding citizens to protect themselves against the criminals. Pretty much of a "no brainer" - but there are a hell of a lot of people in the country with no brains!
Depends on what you mean by gun laws. If you mean the banning of assault weapons Then no. If you mean universal background checks. Then yes. I have looked into the assault weapon ban and the facts are that only a fourth of all massacres were ever commited by assault weapon. Most were commited by small arms, such as pistols. This means that most of the basis of stopping massacres is innacurate. If anything they would have to focus on pistols, which would be automatically struck down. Saying that we have to much gun deaths and that it is because of the guns is innacurate. Most gun deaths are caused in inner cities. Most inner city murders are gang related. And most gangs get weapons illegally. Gun bans would do little to end this gang violence. We should look into universal background checks, which would only prevent criminals or insane from obtaining weapons. And we should have harsher punishments for owning an illegal gun, which would crackdown on gang violence. These are the measures we need to take. Background checks, harsher punishments, fix mental health issues. Look into these issues, before you go for the throat, and just make everyone mad.