Gun Laws should be Stricter

"Since you have left the actual terms for winning said argument completely open by not specifying any sort of terms that i need to prove wrong."I will be arguing that more gun restriction will help prevent crime."Please specify what exactly you want done about gun laws your debate is very vague."Bans on high cap magazines, bans on assault rifles, close the loopholes, universal background checks, and registration.A hammer could be a fairly efficient killing tool in the right context but it also has a lot of valid day to day uses such as building.You can't kill as many people with a hammer as with a gun. Killing with a close range weapon such as a knife, club or hammer has its limitations.* You must get close. This may be impossible under various circumstances.* Getting closer reduces the odds of surprise.* It's much harder to kill someone stronger or taller* The victim may be around friends.* The victim could call out for help.* The crowd may help the victim* In a struggle, the murder may get harmed* The struggle would leave evidence of the murderer.Firearms eliminate all these restrictions*You can kill from afar*Greater odds of surprise.*Can easily kill bigger and stronger people.*It would scare away crowds and cause more death in the crowd.*Almost no chance of struggle there are many day to day recreational uses for guns...Now you might be asking how I validate the need for a 30 round clip and a red dot sight on my Ar15. Its simple really a gun is a tool and it is very multipurpose. I choose to use my Ar15 to hunt coyotes and sell their hides for 25 bucks a pop. This stimulates a lot of my extra income just like a hammer or any other tool used to complete a job does. Do you really need a military assault weapon to kill coyotes? It can easily be done without an assault rifle."If you were to restrict guns you would be restricting the livelyhood of many People"You can use this argument for the possession of anything."I drive to work in an old WWII tank, if you were to restrict tanks you would be restricting the livelihood of many people.""I use sarin gas to kill gophers, if you were to restrict sarin you would be restricting the livelihood of many people.""anymore then outlawing marijuana removed it from your local highschools or proabition stopped moonshiners"It's much harder to make a firearm. You can grow marijuana and make moonshine from what's natural in the earth. Not with firearms. You must admit, if marijuana were legal, more people would be doing it."People will always break any restriction a government implements so why remove guns from hard working honest people when the very ones your scared of would not be affected. Removing guns would not stop criminals it would merely stop the only people able to protect themselves from doing so."Let's draw a parallel between gun laws and sexual assault. No matter how much you try to restrict it, it still happens. Does this mean we should not have any laws prohibiting sexual assault? Same with firearm restrictions. If an action is performed with a gun that is illegal, they can be punished. Thus decreasing the motivation.With all gun regulation being proposed, none limit the rights of the people. Citizens who are capable mentally to own a gun will still be able to do so. The most liberal gun legislation only would confiscate military-grade weapons. Most proposals actually allow for the "grandfathering" of military weapons. It wouldn't stop only the people from being able to protect themselves.My ArgumentGun control has been shown to work."The present study, based on a sample of eighteen countries, confirms the result of previous work based on the 14 countries surveyed during the first International Crime Survey. Substantial correlations were found between gun ownership and gun-related as well as total homicide and suicide rates. Widespread gun ownership has not been found to reduce the likelihood of fatal events committed with other means. Thus, people do not turn to knives and other potententially lethal weapons less often when more guns are available, but more guns usually means more victims of homicide and suicide." -The International Crime Victim Survey [1]It's shown to work in Australia [2] "This ‘Gun History Lesson’ is recycled bunk from a decade ago. Murders in Australia actually are down to record lows."Gun death rateJapan 0.07 /100,000 United Kingdom 0.25 /100,000 Germany 1.10 /100,000 Australia 1.05 /100,000 Israel 1.86 /100,000 United States 10.2 /100,000 [3]As you can see, the ones with the most gun control, have the lowest homicide rate[1] http://www.unicri.eu...[2] http://www.factcheck.org...[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...