Gun Control

Contrary to what you have cited, An article on USA Today, Published as recently as last year, Indicated that Alaska, Alabama and Louisiana had the highest gun crime rates. And look at the legislation - Alaska - No permits, State authorization, Owner license or permit for open carry needed. Alabama - No permits, State authorization, Owner license or permit for open carry needed. Louisiana - No permits, State authorization, Owner license or permit for open carry needed. See the pattern? Such liberal laws do translate into more gun related violence. On the contrary, Illinois came 34th, And Washington 41st on that list. In fact, For that matter, The strict laws in these states has led to such less crime. Also, The UK never banned guns. The 1997 law DID NOT ban pistols as such, And revolvers were permitted with a license. As for the Parkland incident, What you are trying to tell us actually supports my statement - even being on the FBI watchlist, Laws weren't strict enough on possession of guns, And a terrible massacre took place. Had there been arbitrary gun control, That banned guns - banned use of guns by civilians - it would not have turned out like that. Listen to the survivors, Who bore first hand witness to the terrible events - they advocate gun control. Listen to the families of the victims. They are no different. The fact is, From the viewpoint of those affected, Guns are but a menace, And proper control is necessary. A common misconception is that firearms are illegal in Mexico and that no person may possess them. This belief originates due the general perception that only members of law enforcement, The armed forces, Or those in armed security protection are authorized to have them. While it is true that Mexico possesses strict gun laws, Where most types and calibers are reserved to military and law enforcement, The acquisition and ownership of certain firearms and ammunition remains a constitutional right to all Mexican citizens and foreign legal residents, Given the requirements and conditions to exercise such right are fulfilled in accordance to the law. Hitler did it. Fine, But do we see Nazi Germany in bad light because of gun-related violence? Do we consider Nazism as a form of terrorism because Hitler apparently allowed guns to be possessed? Stalin. The government had made it a point to "arm the working people" in the Declaration of the Rights of Working and Exploited People in January 1918. With the introduction of the new Criminal Code in 1960, Penalties were softened significantly for illegal possessions of firearms to only up to two years of imprisonment. The USSR was relatively soft. Mao Zedong. I guess I have to repeat what I said about Hitler - it is insignificant. It is like claiming that gun crime in China makes Mao a terror figure, When today the Chinese government systematically tones down his image for his support of rebellion. Is it guns? No. Please don't cite insignificance - for in the face of healthy debate that just focusses on unimportance, And stands on poor reason. How will I disarm 300 million guns? What if I told you India underwent demonetization of currency notes within just 50 days. 50 days to deposit 40 BILLION notes. Talk about numbers.