Gun Control

"The connection that I was making between guns and illegal drugs was the fact that there are strict laws and punishment in place to prevent individuals from acquiring or distributing drugs and yet almost half of all those incarcerated are in prison for drug related crimes."I understand that Con cited a mess of sources at the bottom. However, I am not going to go through all of Con's sources. Therefore I will consider this to be uncited and I shall disregard it."If the anti-drug legislation has been so unsuccessful then how does one expect anti-gun legislation to be successful."Why does Con assume that gun regulations are inherently anti-gun? We set regulations on cars/planes/food/houses to help keep people safe. That's what gun regulations are intended to do, keep us safe. "When someone wants something like drugs, guns, or other contraband laws won't stop people from getting what they want"I want a Chevrolet Camaro, but I can't afford one because I'm only 16. Laws have been pretty good at keeping me from breaking into a Chevrolet dealership and stealing one. This statement by Con makes it seem like everybody is out breaking all of the laws that they can."Pro seems to put off a majority of arguments made in order to avoid addressing them."Like?"The previous statement does not need sources but rather needs to be looked at logically. If a criminal were to seek firearms then they would most likely buy a firearm through illegal trade."Did I not show that 49/61 of all mass shootings since '82 have been committed with legal firearms? Also, every claim made requires sources. I will not research all claims to ensure their validity. "I have not ever heard of a gang member have a gun permit and license and walk into a gun store to register his gun and go through a background check. In what world does that make sense?"One major problem is that most states do not require a background check at a gun show [11]. "Known as the 'gun show loophole,' most states do not require background checks for firearms purchased at gun shows from private individuals -- federal law only requires licensed dealers to conduct checks."Let's close the loopholes. "When gun restrictions go past the usual background checks and go into wait periods, ammunition limits, several unnecessary permit requirements, having to report the exact location of where the firearm and ammunition will be located in the house, it not only becomes unnecessary but invasive."Guns have one purpose, and one purpose only. That purpose is to kill. If my neighbor is going to have a gun, I'd want the government to know where it's supposed to be kept in case he ever decides to shoot me. If it's not in it's place or it has obviously been moved recently, they'll know to make him a suspect. "What I meant by 'Individuals who go through the legal process and apply for a gun permit care about their own preservation of life.' is the same thing I said in the previous statement. Those who care to acquire guns legally usually are not the ones who intend to use guns for illegal activities."There we go. Con just admitted that people are up to no good are willing to get weapons legally."When gun restrictions go past the usual background checks and go into wait periods, ammunition limits, several unnecessary permit requirements, having to report the exact location of where the firearm and ammunition will be located in the house, it not only becomes unnecessary but invasive."Guns have one purpose, and one purpose only. That purpose is to kill. If my neighbor is going to have a gun, I'd want the government to know where it's supposed to be kept in case he ever decides to shoot me. If it's not in it's place or it has obviously been moved recently, they'll know to make him a suspect."Twice as many children are killed playing football in school (due to head injuries, heatstroke, etc.) than are murdered by guns. A child is more likely to die in a car crash, choke, or drown. A child is at a 2,000x greater risk from getting hit by a car, 130x greater risk from choking on food, and 7x greater risk of drowning than getting shot"These numbers should be 0x because kids shouldn't be being killed by firearms. Also, risk =/= amount of casualties. I believe that Con may have confused risk and uncertainty, which is an easy thing to do. "Risk, as first articulated by the economist Frank H. Knight in 1921, is something that you can put a price on. Say that you’ll win a poker hand unless your opponent draws to an inside straight: the chances of that happening are exactly 1 chance in 11.46 This is risk. It is not pleasant when you take a “bad beat” in poker, but at least you know the odds of it and can account for it ahead of time. In the long run, you’ll make a profit from your opponents making desperate draws with insufficient odds. Uncertainty, on the other hand, is risk that is hard to measure. You might have some vague awareness of the demons lurking out there. You might even be acutely concerned about them. But you have no real idea how many of them there are or when they might strike. Your back-of-the-envelope estimate might be off by a factor of 100 or by a factor of 1,000; there is no good way to know. This is uncertainty. Risk greases the wheels of a free-market economy; uncertainty grinds them to a halt." [12]It's impossible to measure things like the risk of drowning/being hit by a car/choking. We know it might happen one day, but we cannot account for how likely these things are."If you want to compare gun restriction and gun crime then I think "Wadduphomedawg " in the comments section has taken care of that point but I will expand on that after his statement which I pasted here:"As the information presented was not provided by Con, but from a comment, I will ignore it unless it's brought up again."In addition to his statement countries that have imposed strict gun legislation such as Australia, United Kingdom, and Germany have rising crime rates and have took a turn for the worse. USA Today reports that since Australia's 1996 laws banning most guns and making it a crime to use a gun defensively, armed robberies rose by 51%, unarmed robberies by 37%, assaults by 24% and kidnappings by 43%. While murders fell by 3%, manslaughter rose by 16%."I mentioned this before but I'll say it again. I understand that Con cited a mess of sources at the bottom. However, I am not going to go through all of Con's sources. Therefore I will consider this to be uncited and I shall disregard it."Even with the restrictions a 17 year old German high school student murdered 15 and wounded 9 with a single 9mm pistol. The pistol was owned by his father and was owned illegally proving that even a child was able to acquire a gun in a nation with such strict laws on gun control."I have something to say about this so I will pretend it has a cited source. The kid allegedly stole an illegally obtained gun from his father. This is not a failure by the gun regulations. This is a failure to follow the law by his father. "Overall, guns in the United States are used 80 times more often to prevent crime and protect the lives of honest citizens than they are to take lives."Proof? "The best example of the correlation of a drop in crime and gun ownership is in the city of Kennesaw, Georgia... After the law had passed the crime rate had dropped by more than 50% with 89% decline in burglaries"So the plan is to give everybody a gun? Brilliant. Now psychopaths won't have to try very hard to get a high powered firearm. One example of this working to reduce crime in a city of 30,000 people isn't enough to convince me that it should be a model for the nation. Give everybody in Jackson, MS a gun and see how that turns out. Unless gun training is a requirement, a lot of people will die either by accident or on purpose. "The 2nd amemndment absolutely does not state that there must be a militia for the right of the citizens to bear arms. The constitution does not require a militia. Maybe have another read sometime.""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."[9]Let me translate this into modern English. "A well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free country, so citizens' rights to own guns shall not be taken away." There is no well regulated militia. We can't cherry pick from the sentence. "I don't think you understand how any type of war works.If there ever is a need to overthrow a tyrannical gov't i'm sure a population of unarmed citizens can fix things. We can just blog about it right?"For all Con knows, my name is David Patraeus. I will say this again, have fun taking out an F-32b fighter jet with your shotgun. Con has also completely dropped my point about nuclear warheads and mustard gas. "Just cause those countries have recovered doesn't take away from the point"Red China did not/has not fallen. They are going through a power shift, but in no way did they fall. "No one was talking about the Roman Empire, Aztecs, or ottomans. I specifically stated "Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. Read before you reply."Sorry, I didn't realize that it was illegal to bring up new countries. "Do you not support our military having firearms either?"That's irrelevant. Of course I support the military having guns. I'm against untrained civilians having access to weapons of war. ----------I notice something from Alex Jones in the sources. I thought I showed how unreliable he is. Finally, how am I supposed to tell the difference between a criminal wanted for killing ten people, and a normal gun touting citizen? [11] http://www.governing.com...[12] http://www.amazon.com...[13] http://en.wikipedia.org...