By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JRPGfan said:

Because the "common" people are part of the problem.
And yes its gonna be hard and take forever to get all those weapons out of circulation.

But do you know what happends if you dont try?

Shit will never get fixed.

Theres a hole in my roof..... oh well it ll just drip abit, and i ll fix it by saying "thoughts and prayers".
Nothing will change unless you guys decide it needs doing.

And realistically the only way is a total ban, because regulation just doesnt work.
The sooner it goes into effect, the sooner things get better.

How are the common people "part of the problem"? That is a myopic perspective, which ignores the social factors which lead to the crime rates in the U.S and the mass shootings in the first place. Rather than put people in a straight-jacket, the goal should be to fix the fundamental problems which lead to people killing others: income inequality, poverty, drug criminalization, social atomization, capitalism, etc. I'd rather fix these more fundamental problems than treat symptoms. 

And you really haven't addressed the costs of banning weapons. The murder rate, police brutality rates, productive resources, etc would increase in the medium term, and time and resources would be wasted in much the fashion that they were wasted during alcohol prohibition, and our current drug prohibition. 

The U.S is too big of a country, with too many people to effectively ban guns without there being significant costs -- costs which exceed the costs of the social symptoms in the first place. 

Ending the drug war, reforming the criminal justice system, and giving a universal basic income would be miles more effective at reducing overall murder rates than banning weapons, and it wouldn't put racial, ethnic minorities, undocumented immigrants, etc at the mercy of police. 

Last edited by sc94597 - on 29 October 2018