T4R
When I say "gun control", I mean magazine bans, weapon bans, firearm registration, universal government-run background checks, etc....
-
Not as much as people think it will.
-
It will help of course. Everyone knows this.
-
The only thing that would stop Gun crime is the Banning of guns as a whole (as people have said, almost 100% of gun crime has the gun man illegally obtaining his firearm, so the removal of gun shops would mean the gunman would have to go through the black market to get the weapon) But seeing as that's not an option, due to the public being unwilling, I guess this could limit gun crime.
-
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0SloK6pB4g[/url] [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDs-yGTdPFo[/url] [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaQsbdXQuZI[/url] [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwS0W1L0gsM[/url] [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rt-Pccqf7S8[/url] [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPCmefD7Lio[/url] ..........
-
Edited by A Squeaky Pooltoy: 4/13/2013 5:41:03 PMNo, they're too easy to make, and US culture is such that we would make them if we couldn't get them through other means. It's the same thing we did when booze was banned, it's what we've been doing since drugs were banned, and it's what we would do if guns were banned.
-
it will undoubtedly help. will it help enough? we would have to see, were such restrictions to come about.
-
hickok45 does a good job explaining things.
-
Edited by Emacs: 4/13/2013 12:34:05 AMNo. Most times a firearm is used in a crime it was obtained illegally, restrictions on those willing to obey the law can by definition do nothing to stop those who won't. Just look at Canada's statistics, almost 100% of all shootings are committed by people without a license and with an illegally obtained / stored / used firearm. "Gun crime", is almost a non-issue in the bigger picture anyway. More people die in the US every year from lack of appropriate medical care and car accidents individually than from suicides and murders with firearms combined.
-
Edited by Gruntzilla24: 4/12/2013 2:37:21 AMChristina Taylor Green would be alive today if the shooter at Tuscon had a ten round magazine. She was hit by the 13th bullet. Shame on us for thinking gun control can wait, and shame on EVERY politician who didn't treat this issue seriously.
-
Obviously not.
-
Rather be shot in the rare case of being one of those mass shooting victims then stabbed to death.
-
Yes. It has worked in other countries...
-
Maybe it's just me, but I've noticed there tend to be more violence where there are more strict gun control laws.
-
If someone decides to kill someone, they're going to find a way to do it, whether it's with a gun or something else.
-
I'm changing my vote to yes. Stricter gun control will help the criminals. And the question was will it help, no group was identified as the subject.
-
Things like background checks and firearm registration would help a bit, but for the most part the 'bad guys' are going to get their guns from other bad people, such as the drug cartels, regardless of what the government tries to do.
-
Government-run background checks? Possibly. Universal background checks which include medical history, mental history, etc? Definitely. Criminal Record on file? Certainly.
-
It MIGHT reduce the number of deaths. But it fails to address the reasons for shootings entirely.
-
Funny how many say Bungie is a Liberal site too.. These votes say otherwise so far. : D
-
Friendly Reminder: Despite all the claims that the lack of Gun Control is killing this country with guns, Gun Crime is actually DOWN and has been going down for quite some time now.
-
It really will not. Crime will still occur, murders will still be committed, and people will still be shot. Problem is, you are limiting the ability for an average Joe to protect them self. Laws that limit the ownership of firearms do not target criminals, they target the law abiding citizen. Take this into account. Over the past decade more and more states have been going to shall issue for conceal carry, and even a few states have gone constitutional carry meaning no license required. In the past decade there have been more guns sold then at any point in history. In the past decade we saw the sun-setting of the Clinton crime bill as well as the Heller and McDonald case which cemented our right to bear arms. In that same decade we have seen a reduction in crime.
-
Banning "assault weapons" is a completely stupid idea. First of all there's no such thing as an "assault weapon" they're just military style semi-automatic rifles. They want to ban weapons based on appearance not based on how they can kill. While some improved restrictions are necessary the true problem is the stigma attached with mental illness. The people that commit these mass shootings are not sane. By improving the treatment options for those with mental illness and how they are viewed by society. The second issue is how the media covers and portrays these events but that's for another time.
-
I don't know much about the subject. Background checks and firearm registration make sense. I guess a ban on high-capacity magazines does too. I hear "assault weapons" is just a distinction made based on appearances, rather than function, so that's dumb.
-
I'd like to see a ban on handguns larger than .22 caliber. The smaller magazine size is a no-brainer for cutting down on mass-shooting deaths, but the vast majority of the handgun deaths in this country are caused gang violence where hoodrats shoot up their neighborhoods with cheap, easy to acquire pistols. It won't happen overnight, but pretty soon none of those goons will be walking around packing heat they can hide in their stupid low-hanging pants. Why do you think none of them are toting automatic AK-47s? Because those kinds of guns are BANNED and are [i]extremely[/i] hard for your typical poor, lowbrow hoodrat to get.
-
It can just as easily make things worse.
-
[url=http://factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhetoric-vs-gun-facts/]despite all the hype and paranoia, gun violence is on the decline and has been for the past 20 years[/url]