| Mr Khan said: It's not about reducing crime, it's about reducing death from crime or death from people trying to prevent crime (or who think they're trying to prevent crime, a la Treyvon Martin). If you get hit over the head with a baseball bat in a mugging, that's a tragedy, but you're much less likely to die than if someone shoots you in the head. And if you have to mace or tase or otherwise disable someone who is attacking you, at least you haven't killed them. |
And that's certainly true, that you're more likely to survive when there's no gun involved. Yet the only consistent data I have seen shows that there is less gun related crime when guns are allowed. That should reduce death from crime, because there's less crime happening. If you have data that disproves that, please share. But I have not seen that to be the case.
It also comes down to whether or not people are willing to give up the right to carry a gun. Is it okay to restrict something from everyone, just because a few people abuse it? I don't think it is. Especially when removing that right has not been proven to actually help anything.
