Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 5 years ago

Gun supporters, what's your response to these arguments?

Most gun crimes are committed with legally obtained guns.

Look at a country like the UK that's banned guns and their crime is lower.

The founding fathers didn't think guns would evolve into what we have now.

Banning guns will decrease the crime.

Update:

Thank you, I will definitely be saving your response for future debate! :)

8 Answers

Relevance
  • 5 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Your arguments are not good arguments.

    Chicago has some of the strictest laws in the United States. More homicides happen in Chicago than just about anywhere else. Guns are all but banned in the city, yet gun crime is rampant. Why, if you can't legally obtain a gun? What, are people just throwing bullets really hard? Those bad guys are getting those guns from somewhere, and it's not the local gun shops, because there aren't any local gun shops.

    Your argument about the UK is BS. I looked it up. How is there a gun crime capitol ANYWHERE in the UK when guns are banned in the UK? I mean really? Your words about CRIME being less was certainly attempting to be misleading, leaving out the word GUN out of gun crime, but it wasn't misleading to me.

    "This week the West Midlands was labelled “the nation’s gun crime capital” as figures from the Office for National Statistics showed that the region now has a higher rate of firearms offences for its population than London." Now how is that even possible if guns are banned? Full disclosure. The article is from 2015, but the point is the same: Gun ban doesn't mean nobody has guns. And it sure as hell doesn't mean that nobody dies from them. It just means law abiding citizens don't have them. ("Offences" is Queen's English for "offenses.")

    Tosh about the Founding Fathers. Guns came into existence in the 13th Century. Think you that they didn't progress into newer, bigger, better by the 18th Century? Think you that Washington, in his lifetime, didn't see the capabilities of guns change? From 1732 to 1799 they changed a lot, Baby. And the Founding Fathers, and the patriots of this great nation, forced to fight a larger, more capable, subjugating, occupying army who had superior weapons to what we had, and little old us unable to protect ourselves?

    You think that Washington and the Founding Fathers DIDN'T think it was a good idea that the citizenry should be equally matched to the government or an invading force? When the English came back for a second bite of the apple in 1812, do you honestly believe that they were still fighting with 1765 muskets? Or do you think they upgraded their fire power? One thing is for certain: If we hadn't upgrades ours, we'd be a British territory today.

    Banning guns does not reduce crime. It doesn't even reduce gun crime. In open carry states like mine, crime is less, gun crime is less. Homicide rates are less. Why? Because John Q. Citizen, being well trained and armed, might just plug you if you try that shiznitz. That's a real live risk you take in states like mine. Add to that, more people are murdered with blunt instruments than any other thing: Lamps, bricks, irons. Then knives, then hands. Guns actually account for very few homicides comparatively speaking.

    And now put it in perspective: About 12,000 people were killed by guns last year. Included in that number are suicides, accidents, and officer-involved shootings. It is, no doubt, a shame and a blight. But 35,000 people last year were killed in car accidents. 70,000 people from alcohol-related deaths. 400,000 from medical mistakes. We know the number is 400,000 because those "adverse events" have to be reported to the state as "adverse events." I do not minimize the horror of gun death, but really. I am three times as likely to die in a car, and 33 times more likely to die by doctor.

    And one more thing: If a bad man comes into my house in the middle of the night to cause me harm, with my gun I have a 50/50 shot of saving myself and my children. Without my gun, I have a 100% of being raped and murdered. Why is that okay with you?

  • Joshua
    Lv 5
    5 years ago

    Ok I'm going to say something that probably all sides will be against. ....but I live in a city where I've been held at gun point on several occasions by police officers. Where police routinely beat people up with impunity and shoot unarmed people, getting off by simply saying "he was reaching for something"...Not too mention I've deployed to Iraq 3 times, a combat zone and I've felt my life was more endanger during my several encounters with Baltimore police then my entire 3 combat deployments..........that being said my stance on guns has changed dramatically. If police can patrol my neighborhood as if they are a foreign military occupying territory, terrorizing every day citizens going about their business then I should be able to legally carry a firearm to protect myself against the police. Maybe they'd be less likely f@ck with people if they knew even the everyday working man was armed

  • 5 years ago

    I question your statement that most gun crimes are committed with legally obtained guns. But for the sake of argument, let's say you're correct. With the millions of guns in America today, how is banning guns going to decrease crime? They are already here. That genie is out of the bottle and there is no way you can put it back in in a free society. So unless you are advocating for jack-booted thugs going door-to-door confiscating weapons, banning guns is not the answer.

  • 5 years ago

    most knife crimes are committed with legally obtained knives. In fact "knives" and "hands and fists" account for 600% more violent crime than guns, per the CDC.

    See link for your second line

    Read the Federalist papers, particularly #29, to see what the founding Fathers thought about guns and the WHY of their public ownership.

    Banning guns still leaves the violent people , and actually the violent people will still have guns. They can be stolen, imported, manufactured (<<see India, Pakistan and New Guinea)

    you are fixating on an object, I want to deal with violent people, no matter what tool they use.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    5 years ago

    I see you have absolutely nothing to back up your claims. How could it possibly, possibly be that guns sales have gone up, but crime has gone down, if you are correct? Answer: it isn't possible if you are correct.

    Obama’s Numbers (January 2016 Update) - Homicides have dropped 13 percent, but gun sales have surged.

    http://www.factcheck.org/2016/01/obamas-numbers-ja...

    YOU JUST GOT PWNT ON YOUR OWN QUESTION!!

  • ?
    Lv 7
    5 years ago

    Don't bother. They'll still cling to the stale arguments of how communist regimes disarmed its citizens and killed them [with guns]

    smh

    ~Aizen

  • 5 years ago

    I imagine gun supporters value the 2nd amendment more than anything else and/or are so paranoid that they feel it necessary to "defend themselves" from threats that mostly don't exist.

  • Anonymous
    5 years ago

    Kons dont care who gets guns

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.