The UK has among the lowest firearms related deaths in the world. US among the highest - though mainly when overtaken it is by countries where there is civil war. And what about Chicago and New York - last time anyone looked they were still in the US?
Here's something everyone in the world gets except the gun nuts: arming every citizen makes society more dangerous - not safer. And spare me the "then only criminals will have guns" line. No - then there will be way fewer guns, illegal access on the streets will be limited to prices trigger-happy thugs can't afford and only the people who should have them will (police, armed forces).
I'm debating, don't take things so personally.
Chicago and NYC have the strictest gun laws yet the most gun crimes/death in the US. Whenever citizens can't protect themselves with guns the criminals get even bolder.
Prices may get high on the black market but criminals will always be able to get guns and they don't always pay for them.
You know dictators like Hitler take the citizen's guns.
Whether Chicago and NYC have strict controls or not will not matter as much if one can go anywhere else in the state or a nearby state and easily acquire arms. I expect these cities have a lot of gun crime and are making a political statement with controls to stand up to the lucrative gun lobby.
Nor can I think of any other politically stable country where citizens need or feel they need to have guns to protect themselves from criminals or their government. Police are paid to keep the peace and enforce laws - not a bunch of gun-toting yahoo vigilantes. And there are plenty of dictatorships and undemocratic countries where the citizens are armed to the teeth. We live by the ballot - not by the barrel - in democracies.
Police only show up after the fact like tommythecat said. They don't prevent any gun related crimes.
Ok here's a hypothetical: Lets say you have a family including teenage girls and you hear someone break in your home. And the criminal has a gun because they can get them whether legal or not.
Do you want to beg him not to steal, kill, or rape? Would you rather just let him take what or who he wants? Or would you prefer to show him it was a mistake breaking in your home?
When it hits home people choose to protect themselves.
IIN, that I'm EXCITED about Obama's new big gun control crackdown?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
Don't try to brow-beat me.
The UK has among the lowest firearms related deaths in the world. US among the highest - though mainly when overtaken it is by countries where there is civil war. And what about Chicago and New York - last time anyone looked they were still in the US?
Here's something everyone in the world gets except the gun nuts: arming every citizen makes society more dangerous - not safer. And spare me the "then only criminals will have guns" line. No - then there will be way fewer guns, illegal access on the streets will be limited to prices trigger-happy thugs can't afford and only the people who should have them will (police, armed forces).
--
robbieforgotpw
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
I'm debating, don't take things so personally.
Chicago and NYC have the strictest gun laws yet the most gun crimes/death in the US. Whenever citizens can't protect themselves with guns the criminals get even bolder.
Prices may get high on the black market but criminals will always be able to get guns and they don't always pay for them.
You know dictators like Hitler take the citizen's guns.
--
Mando
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
My mistake to personalize.
Whether Chicago and NYC have strict controls or not will not matter as much if one can go anywhere else in the state or a nearby state and easily acquire arms. I expect these cities have a lot of gun crime and are making a political statement with controls to stand up to the lucrative gun lobby.
Nor can I think of any other politically stable country where citizens need or feel they need to have guns to protect themselves from criminals or their government. Police are paid to keep the peace and enforce laws - not a bunch of gun-toting yahoo vigilantes. And there are plenty of dictatorships and undemocratic countries where the citizens are armed to the teeth. We live by the ballot - not by the barrel - in democracies.
--
robbieforgotpw
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Police only show up after the fact like tommythecat said. They don't prevent any gun related crimes.
Ok here's a hypothetical: Lets say you have a family including teenage girls and you hear someone break in your home. And the criminal has a gun because they can get them whether legal or not.
Do you want to beg him not to steal, kill, or rape? Would you rather just let him take what or who he wants? Or would you prefer to show him it was a mistake breaking in your home?
When it hits home people choose to protect themselves.