Skip to main content

View Diary: Staggering U.S. Firearm Facts (63 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Same reasons you said....but that was not the (5+ / 0-)

    implications stated above.  It is obvious that having strict gun laws has not helped Chicago curb its gun violence. So naturally the next thing that is brought up is "well it is because guns are being imported".....ummmm no.  Otherwise, you would find the same explosion in other places that do not have strict gun laws but are importing guns to Chicago....if the correlation was indeed due to the laws to begin with.

    Strict gun laws do not hinder criminal behavior because criminals don't obey the law.  Strict gun laws hinder the law abiding gun owner's right to own one...because they do obey the law.

    •  Indeed (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      theatre goon, Utahrd

      Places have crime problems because of social, economic, and cultural issues.  The response is to pass gun restrictions in the hopes of reducing the crime.  It doesn't work, so the restrictions get worse until full scale bans are in place.  And yet the crime remains.

      Giving a gun to a law abiding citizens does not cause more crime.  Taking guns away from criminals does not reduce crime.  The idea that more guns equals more crime is false.  Criminals are criminals regardless and are so because of factors other than a gun.

    •  faulty argument (0+ / 0-)

      You're ignoring population density.

      Correct for that and your argument evaporates.

      •  So you believe that strict gun laws hinder (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Utahrd

        criminal behavior?  Do gang members suddenly drop their weapons because they are now banned? The answer is no they do not. Why would they as generally they are already banned from owning them in the first place....if they are felons and/or too young and/or drug users.

        Have you ever considered the fact that in places in which they have strict gun laws, that the general population (those who are law abiding and thus choose not to have a weapon to protect themselves....because to do so would make them a criminal) have no means to protect themselves and so you find a higher rate of robberies, muggings and/or home invasions in which they are victims involved and not just property? Chicago has the phenomenon.

         I wonder if crime might go down in these areas if all of a sudden, guns were more prevalent in the hands of the law abiding. Perhaps the criminals would second guess the decision to pick any home on the block...when they are unaware if the occupants were armed or not.

        •  Thank you, LaPierre! (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JMcDonald
          I wonder if crime might go down in these areas if all of a sudden, guns were more prevalent in the hands of the law abiding. Perhaps the criminals would second guess the decision to pick any home on the block...when they are unaware if the occupants were armed or not.
          •  Is there any way you could just answer the (0+ / 0-)

            questions?  It is a discussion, is it not?

             Do you believe that strict gun laws hinder criminal behavior?  That is the purpose of all the debates, all the discussions and the reasons behind every new law....is it not? So each new law should, at the very least, have some general purpose toward that goal and/ or some kind of rational backing that would support that goal.

        •  yes, gang violence will drop (0+ / 0-)

          if you actually control weapons.

          Other nations also have inner-city gangs, but their homicide rate is a fraction of ours.

          But to get to real control, we need a permeant national gun registry, thorough background checks (including family members), strict liability (every gun and every bullet ALWAYS has someone liable for it), and stiff penalties (5+ years in prison) for things like straw-man purchases.

          Do that, and gang violence will become vastly lower.

        •  you don't need to wonder (0+ / 0-)

          Correcting for everything else, homes with guns have double the homicide rate, a dozen times the suicide rate.

          More legal guns => more dead people

      •  Hawaii must be dangerous (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Bailey2001

        New Hampshire, too.

        "states like VT and ID are not 'real america'" -icemilkcoffee

        by Utahrd on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 09:07:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (130)
  • Community (65)
  • Bernie Sanders (44)
  • Elections (40)
  • 2016 (38)
  • Climate Change (33)
  • Environment (32)
  • Culture (31)
  • Hillary Clinton (29)
  • Science (28)
  • Republicans (26)
  • Media (25)
  • Civil Rights (24)
  • Barack Obama (24)
  • Education (23)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (21)
  • Law (21)
  • Economy (19)
  • Congress (17)
  • Labor (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site