o_O.Q said:
you cut out the part where i mention the millions of guns already in circulation... what are you going to do about that? raid everyone's home to take away the guns they already possess? lets be ridiculous and say you do that and some people hide their guns out in the woods, what's stopping them from taking them up and going on shooting sprees again? "Can you find such a solution to the thieving problem?" you didn't provide a solution, you simply ignored reality as people that adopt the "victim blaming" ideology always do
"what you need has a lot of legit use as well." guns have a legitimate use as well, such as ending government tyranny |
I literally said getting rid of the existing guns is the really hard part. You compared guns and thieving in a logically unsound way, and that is the only part I wrote about. The solution to the gun problem is simple and effective but really, really hard to pull off. There doesn't exist anything similar to the thieving problem: Beyond countering the criminals, there just isn't anything comparable to banning most guns. And just to make this clear: I'm not even slightly suggesting that banning guns is a viable solution. I'm saying it's a solution that would most likely work if it could be pulled off, but nothing similar exists to solve the thieving problem.
As for your last point, I'm aware of that. Tools used for thefts have more immediate legit uses though. The tools used for thefts have everyday use in a lot of jobs. The use for guns is on a level that isn't really comparable. I'm not saying whether either is better in the long run, but in the short run, almost nothing would change if guns were largely banned - but a lot would change if tools used for thefts were banned.
