U.S.A. should stop selling firearms and change the gun law. (continued)

You sure took your time xD, but anyway you haven't responded to the fact that you could buy 2 guns from the store and kill over 30 people in the school. By not responding means you actually accept the argument which is a major argument against the selling of guns in USA. "The debate isn't about whether or not guns should be banned from the world, the debate is about whether or not the USA should stop selling guns and change the law to make them illegal. Even assuming the USA banned all guns and stopped producing them, criminals could smuggle them in from other nations. Then the citizen would still need guns to defend himself and to ward off government tyranny." I never ever stated that guns should be banned from the world, i simply show you that USA would be better off without the selling of firearms. And even so, how easy do you think smuggling is? Every border has a check post or something whatever its called and at airports, theres the customs who WOULD check your luggage for anything suspicious like firearms, explosives etc. Also, the government cannot be reckless and order all the people who are against him to be executed. It attracts alot of attention and suspicion from neightbour lands and just like Hitler, who puts the blame on jews and attacked Poland. You could defend yourself from such tyranny, but you will not survive. You will be better off by just following the other people. "I personally would find it odd that a six year has a AK. I would not at all find it odd that a grown man or women would walk around with one." We don't want your opinion, but even so, if you saw someone with an AK for example, doesn't that make YOU feel threatened? Everyone wants to safely walk around the streets without the sight of firearms, but you see people around with pistols and shotgun. NO ONE wants that. "Except a lot of crime does directly target the individual, such as mugging and robbery as well as rape, just to name a few. It is true that one could cower during a bank robbery and "get away" and it is up to the gun owner whether or not to do anything in that situation. It would be pretty dumb to take on 3 criminals with automatic weapons, but against one it might not be so dumb." You gotta be kidding me, no one here would be dumb enough to rob a bank on his own. But theres a possibility of an one man robbery armed with an AK in shops. Even so, you still are better off without the gun. No one would pull a pistol while under surveillance of the robber since it will end up with you getting shot. "While it 'may' be easier for a criminal to get his hands on a gun since they're legal, they would get them whether or not they were legal. Furthermore, if a criminal broke into your house while you were home and had a gun, that robbery would be over very quickly. There are many ways to secure a firearm if one is not at home, such as trigger locks and other devices. The criminal won't be able to do much with the weapon if the owner has the key." You are absolutely right about this, but ending the robbery with a shootout will be bad for the people not involved like your children. Also, what i mean about the target practice is, you want to assassinate someone, but have no experience with a sniper rifle. Of course the shooting range offers you the chance to experience with the sniper rifle. Another example is if you got yourself a heavy firearm that you have no experience with, you could just go to the shooting range and do it like you did with the sniper rifle. Being experienced in firearm is much better for the criminals. We civilians has no need to be on a shooting range since we will NEVER use a gun for a purpose other then killing. "This is a rather unabashed assertion. At any rate, if the Jews had been armed they would have had better means to resist against being a target of discrimination and genocide. Hitler passed laws to ban Jews from gun ownership" This is a rather unrelated argument, but for the sake of argue my argument comes that the Jews already think its over. The jews sees Hitler as an Anti Christ and thought the end was near. And even if they are armed with weapons, they are no match for the trained Wehrmacht. "The USSR also killed millions of Ukrainians in government-created famine and had widespread civil rights violations against numerous groups of society. Communism (Or at least that used in the USSR) is authoritarian and tyrannical. Its "citizens" had no means to resist against their security appretues primarily because they had no guns." Once again, you are absolutely right, but the fact if a shootout breaks out, its bad for both shooters and the innocent bystanders. Also, if you even managed to kill a soldier coming for you, you WILL be hunted. And the reaction of the Soviet Union will be more intense. "Trust me, there are a lot around and they are very militarized. Regardless, they still cannot be magically at every crime and stop it." I tell you again, no guns sold = less crimes. "That is for the individual to decide. One would certainly be within your rights to. And you're assuming the police will catch the mugger." What you wanna do then? Catch the mugger yourself? Or shoot him in the head if you see him again? The police does his job so he will be caught. "Let's assume for the sake of argument guns are outlawed and the millions of guns that are in America are all turned into the authorities. How would a person defend themselves? To use a specific example, let's say a women is walking home from work and is assaulted by three young and strong men. What is she supposed to do? While she could use pepper spray, a taser, or a rape whistle, some of these will only work against one attacker and not the rest. If she had a .38 special, all three men could be killed in a much shorter period of time and she would be safe. This can easily be extended to a male walking home for work and being assaulted by a mugger wielding a baseball bat or other improvised weapon. Without a gun, he'd be hopeless against the stronger man who is armed. A gun evens those odds considerably. Guns allow people who wouldn't otherwise be able to protect themselves physically normally to do so." And here comes my same argument. At night, if 3 man are coming at you armed too and already has a pistol drawed on you because it is planned, do YOU think you had the time to draw a gun and shoot back? No, I answer. Now lets look at the other way. If you see 3 man coming unarmed, attempting to rape you (or rob, unless its gay rape :P) and you have a taser and a pepperspray, you could just fight back by using a pepperspray in the eyes or shoot them with a taser. If the robber or raper is armed with by example a baseball bat or a knife, you could just still use the pepperspray or taser on him. Don't have one? Thats your problem. "Even in your Utopian world where no guns exist at all, other weapons and crime would exist. Do we really want to go back to the time were the strongest man usually got his way?" Yes, crime does still exist, but it will be harder for criminals to pull of a crime and even harder if he meets the cops armed. Firearms may work both for civilians and criminals, but criminals will pull off their crimes easier. "I actually made a typo. I meant to say the worst atrocities are committed in areas (such as schools) where guns are strictly prohibited." You actually contradicted yourself here. Firearms are NOT allowed in school and yet, shootout appears in schools and the number of shootouts starts to increase every year. Such shootouts will be lessened by ALOT if no guns are even sold. (Remember my argument about the Virginia Tech Massacre) I see firearms as a threat to the world, but also as a weapon against the criminals. But if firearms can be sold to anyone, it won't be safe anymore. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org... http://news.bbc.co.uk...