Doesn't more guns mean more voilence in the street?

elchistoso69

If that were true, then we would see a rise in firearm related crimes after states have passed concealed carry laws.

The opposite is what happens.

Therefore, you are a liberal idiot.

Can't you see that?

El Chistoso

krollohare2

No. You are equating guns with violence. Look at England. Stabbing deaths have risen dramatically after firearms were outlawed. And have gone up 2.5 times since last year.

Poohcat1

Guns dont kill people. People kill people. It wouldn't matter if the government banned all guns. The bad guys will still get them just like they get their crack and other drugs. A ban on guns would only hurt the people who are responsible in their use.

canufacereality

an armed population is a polite population ! you fkng libs never learn.......

DOOM

No.

The banning of guns lets criminals know that the people they're about to attack don't have a gun.

At one time Washington DC was the murder capital of the world. At the same time, guns were illegal to carry in Washington DC.

Can't you see that?

El Scott

People commit crimes, not guns. Can't you see that? I have never seen a gun rob a store all by itself or spontaneously go off and shoot someone.

burdfour

What I can see is that states with right to carry laws have LESS violence. http://www.everycowgirlsdream.com/righttocarry.html
"When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will carry guns."
Doesn't it seem strange to you, that, if your hypothesis were true, cops would be AGAINST gun ownership, where as, in fact, most seem to be FOR gun ownership?

Grandad John Wayne G.

Why We Need to Protect Our â€˜Right To Own And Bear Armsâ€™

The Second Amendment to the Constitution reads:

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

For years I misunderstood this amendment. My thinking was that since we had a military force, there was no need for â€œthe peopleâ€ to be armed. After all, we had the Military to protect the country and the Police to protect the citizens. Right? Apparently not quite.

Itâ€™s only as I got older, and wiser (as the saying goes), that Iâ€™ve come to understand what our founding fathers were saying. Not only is it our sole responsibility to protect ourselves (personal responsibility at itâ€™s finest if you ask me); but the second amendment also allows us to protect ourselves from any invading force, be it external or internal. Yes, internal as in perhaps the government running amok and stealing our freedom and liberty.

History is wrought with oppressive government's run amok. That is EXACTLY why our forefathers included the second amendment. It is NOT an antiquated amendment. In fact, it bears as much or MORE importance in the our country TODAY than EVER before...The only thing Government cares about is MORE Government and MORE control. The Bush Admin. proved this very much over last 8 years, with bills like the "patriot act" a title that couldn't be more ironic; as the patriot act INFRINGES upon American rights. The Government must ALWAYS be held in check. It is SUPPOSED to be a Government run By the people, of the people and For the people. And as soon as you give up your guns. You NO LONGER are free...History has proven this. Martial Law would rule. that means, Tanks and Military Policing the streets....OUR STREETS...That is not freedom...That is Nazi Germany.

This is not to say, that I want to see an violent revolution...That should always be our last resort. We are SUPPOSED to be able to change the system by electing PUBLIC SERVANTS. I.E. congressmen, the President etc..That is what they are. Public Servants. If we lose sight of this and allow the Government to RUN OUR LIVES, then we will be oppressed. and when that happens, unfortunately as HISTORY has shown us, the ONLY way to repair the damage IS to take up arms against the oppressors...Let's hope it doesn't come to that

But don't forget. America was FOUNDED on VIOLENT REVOLUTION. and the forefathers KNEW the inherent dangers that come with Government and KNEW that it could ALWAYS be corrupted from within because of "Man's" lust for power and greed. and that is why we have the 2nd amendment.

mlbjock_58

only in the possession of those that would commit mayhem, a deterrent to the same would be a well armed civil population, such as we see in arizona and texas florida also solved a criminal problem by easing gun control regs

jamie s

Guns are already readily available in the city. More guns wouldn't change that.. Right now, I don't think it matters..

Hopalong Cassidy

That is the weakest argument the liberals have. Guns do not cause crime any more than flies cause garbage, or forks making Rosie O'Donnell fat.

Criminals cause crime, not guns. Where was the big out roar to outlaw knives after the OJ trial?

The United States has not been invaded since 1812. In part, because America is armed. We do not have or need foreign troops on our soil, Why? In, part, because America is armed.

Remember, the Second Amendment makes all the others possible.

If you don't want to own a gun, so be it. But don't blame the tool, blame the user.

cutiessailor

Not at all. approximately 1000 times a day a legal gun owner prevents a crime or violence through the presentation of a weapon. More legal gun owners would cut violence down. Very few of the crimes using firearms completed by legal users. If 10% of the us population it would cut down victimized crimes such robbery, rape, and grievous assaults way down. Criminals are in general lazy and cowardly. If they knew that there was a 10% chance of getting shot every time they commit a crime they might think twice.

Coasty

I spent 6 years working for the Federal Government as a law enforcement officer. I had much rather be in a place where every adult is trained with fire arms and openly carrying one than do a boarding in someplace where I knew drugs were involved but could not see or know people were armed.

Marxist President Obama

Unarmed in Mumbai, 200 dead 300 injured. This is the perfect example of why gun restrictions don't work. Only the criminals will have guns.

scredawg

NO! More "legal" guns on the street means more dead criminals...

BoatSailor

No.
It may be a more intelligent, albeit rhetorical, comparison to ask, "Doesn't more vehicles on the road (or more licensed drivers) mean more vehicle-related deaths?"
There are far more responsible, mature, law-abiding, non-violent firearm owners than there are criminals or sickos who bring violence upon others with firearms.
By the way, you misspelled the word "violence." Even with the available spell-checker.

gunplumber_462

No. More guns means it's far riskier to choose the criminal lifestyle. More guns - less crime.

ebola_patient_zero

Ask the people of Kennesaw, GA. They have a law that requires heads of households to own a firearm and ammo for that firearm. While you might expect mandatory firearm ownership would lead to pistol duels on main street at high noon every day, all types of crime went down by over 20% the year that law was enacted.

Lurch

More illegal guns mean more violence in the street.

THUG LIFE

Please, please, PLEASE look at this link and tell me that keeping guns away from law abiding citizens are what will decrease violence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YS7bPGoMBW4

That video was shot in West Baltimore up off of North Avenue, you're plenty welcome to go there. Those guys had at least five handguns that I could count, probably more.

Look Away, I'm Hideous

i believe the free availability of bullets is the problem

White-Knuckle Blackout!

Regardless of whatever people try to do to stop weapons being carried on the streets, society is going down the shitter at the moment and there doesn't seem to be anyway to stop it...

EDIT

It's only a matter of time now untill everything falls apart, this economic decline is just agrivating people and it's only a matter of time untill everyone gets so enraged that they need a target for their aggression... that target will most likely be the government and anyone who tries to stop them. But seriously, if things don't pick up soon things are going to get worse and worse.

Gloria A

There are enough violence in the street, and guns doesn't hep at all. The fact is that many children and people had been killed by accident. Once when Ronald Regan the president was shot, he still insisted in legalizig gun. They could stop that on time, but they let it go so far like gang members. A little problem become a big problem. However, there is the other side of coin, the bad guys always has a way to get a guns. If you life in suburn, outside the city and you don't have a gun, they just come and kill the whole family. If you live in the city you could be standing in front of your the door and some bad guys passed by and shut you or anybody for no reason at all. In some places you don't have to go out at all, the bullet get though your house or school and kill people inside the house. I think a the system is not working. I think we should have gun control, that in order to possess a gun people should be screnned and investigated. Remember what happened in Virginia that all those student were killed? was that in Virginia or I'm wrong? There are many people with mental desease and they don't really care. I agreed than more guns, more violence. I could go on and on but I have to go. Maybe your dad knows that in the old time there were no guns, and people use to fight with (esgrima) and machete, but it take longer to kill somebody with the machete, However, let put a little bit of humor, I would rather be killed with a bullet than with the machete or a knife. I'm terrified of knife. However, the mob use both, gun, knife or they hang you. Did you see the move "Godfather?" to be continue, have a good weekend....good question. In another way, not matter how we put it, we cann't win.

gomanyes

Pretty much all statistics show that when you compare western democracies, higher rates of gun ownership correlate to higher crime rates. But, as a marketing professor once said, "if you have enough money, you can get people to believe anything you want." And gun manufacturers have a lot of money.

Rox

It seems that people want EVERYONE to have a gun or NO ONE to have a gun.

Since other people have guns, there's worry. Some people feel that the only way to be safe is to have a weapon with them so that they're safe.

Others believe that people shouldn't have guns in the first place because we wouldn't need to defend ourselves if there were no weapons to begin with.

Personally, I think that no matter what weapons are around, the violent people will still be violent. Without guns, it'll just be harder to express that violence.

I don't see the point in something specifically made to hurt. Anything can be a weapon. The fact that we sell guns to people just shows that we're encouraging violence

â˜»â˜†REBEL DEVILâ˜†â˜º

yes I agree, although if we ban them completely I believe that people will still use them one way or another and crimes will still be committed only this time with no way of tracing the criminal.

Amanda

Yeah I would never own a gun. But if they're legal at least they have to be registered...so if something happens and the gun is involved, they have a better chance of tracking down the person resonsible. Either way if someone wants a gun bad enough they'll find it, whether it's legal or not.

inka <3

Off course, what a sad world we live in.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: