Gun Bans

Counterarguments: A) Gun bans results in more crime. Elementary logic says that after it does not always mean because of it. There are more factors than gun ban that could increase the homicidal rate including demographics, economics and the drug trade. There are many types of gun control with their problems and flaws. "The proposition that strict gun laws cause crime is harder to accept than the proposition that strict gun laws in part grow out of the fact that a nation already has a higher crime rate." Lawmakers are trying to solve the problem with gun bans so that they can reduce gun violence and deaths. Therefore, they should be allowed to evaluate the problem and assess it for themselves to set reasonable gun control policies. Source: http://www.nytimes.com... Keeping the gun control policies the way they are currently won't decrease gun violence or deaths. Some people want change to help solve the problem. Some such as Barack Obama has proposed change to the United States. Did you know that "Barack Obama supported a proposal to ban gun stores within 5 miles of a school or park, which would eliminate almost every gun store in America?" Source: http://www.gunbanobama.com... You may argue that change isn't always a good thing and we are dealing with lives. Letting everyone have a gun won't decrease the crime rate, wouldn't you agree? In fact, "American children are more at risk from firearms than the children of any other industrialized nation. In one year, firearms killed no children in Japan, 19 in Great Britain, 57 in Germany, 109 in France, 153 in Canada, and 5,285 in the United States. (Centers for Disease Control)" The cause of it was because America is the world's freest, most uncontrolled gun culture. Source: http://www.neahin.org... Unless you can propose another solution that is perfect and flawless that will help reduce gun violence and deaths, gun bans can only be used to stop them. B) Situations Situation 1 (With Gun): You grab the handgun; the criminal sees you have a gun pointed on him, and the criminal shoots you first. If PoeJoe is armed, he will most likely shoot to cover his identity according to situation 2 when you don't have a gun. If you don't want to kill him and hesitate, PoeJoe can shoot. You can only shoot him if your actions would be called justifiable homicide. "The circumstances under which homicide is justified are usually considered to be that the defendant had no alternative method of self-defense or defense of another than to kill the attacker" such as escape, self-defense weapons, or burglar alarms. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org... The criminal runs out of your home and the criminal doesn't drop anything. Possible results could occur: Then he comes back later to kill you when you go back to sleep. He robs your home when you are at school or work assuming that he can kick down the door. He doesn't run out because he decides to shoot you and risk death. Situation 2 (Without Gun): You hide in the corner begging for mercy and then you beat the criminal up, because both of you have no guns. PoeJoe needs to get the gun from somewhere else assuming he can't manufacture a gun by himself. Very unlikely if a global ban has been set up. He shoots you to make sure his identity was still hidden and DNA analysis was used to track down the bullet to its owner, then the criminal is brought to justice. In my last round, I put possible results from those situations and they don't coexist at the same time. Consider a problem and you put multiple solutions that don't coexist. Then you would evaluate all of the solutions and those the best solution. He has a gun and sees you hiding in the corner begging for mercy and because he thought that the gun ban made you defenseless, you shot hit with a taser gun disguised as a flashlight or cell phone. "As a general rule, a one-half second contact will repel and startle the attacker, giving some pain and muscle contraction. One to two seconds will cause muscle spasms and a dazed mental state. Over three seconds will cause loss of balance and muscle control, mental confusion and disorientation." So basically, it takes three to five seconds to completely immobilize the attacker. And since PoeJoe thinks that you're defenseless because of the gun ban, a taser disguises as a flashlight or cell phone would make a huge nasty shock. Source: http://www.selfdefenseweapons.com... "But that doesn't mean that he is intelligent enough to get a gun if gun were banned". The best solution - global gun ban. Just because your family knows how to make a gun, doesn't mean that every criminal knows too. Why don't criminals just make guns instead of buying them from gun stores so that they couldn't be identified? This is how we can enforce it: global ban and "while the U.N. has no power to force the U.S. to ban gun ownership, it can, with the enthusiastic help of the foreign and domestic anti-self-defense media, create a powerful international movement to shame the U.S. into junking the Second Amendment rights of private gun ownership." The U.N. proposed: # Strategies to reduce the number of guns in private hands that include mandating a maximum one-gun-per-person rule; # A ban on possession of handguns by anyone other than government officials and target shooters who would be forced to store their weapons at shooting ranges; # Worldwide licensing of firearms registered in a vast U.N. computer bank. Source: http://archive.newsmax.com... I will elaborate in further rounds.