By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
ConservagameR said:
sundin13 said:

First of all, I'm not advocating getting rid of guns. But beyond that, the USA is the chief supplier of guns across the whole of North America. If we were able to get a handle on our gun problem, it would significantly help both Canada and Mexico deal with their gun problems and reduce the supply to criminals across the continent. 

As for whether killings would decrease, I believe it would reduce a lot of impulsive crime in particular. It is far from uncommon to have a scenario where two guys get into a fight and one ends up pulling out a gun and killing the other. If you take the gun out of those situations, they may throw hands, but the odds of death decreases drastically. While you do see knife crime in other countries like the UK, you also see a drastically lower homicide rate in general. Even then, I would much rather someone come at me with a knife than with a gun (and there are further subdivisions regarding different calibers of ammunition). 

At the end of the day, the US is pretty good evidence by itself that more guns isn't the solution to the crime problem. 

Well if a lot of strict laws aren't working already, more stricter laws from a federal level are quite unlikely to make a difference. It may reduce those types of crimes criminals are committing, but they're more likely to change tactics or types of crime before becoming honorable citizens. So the problem would just shift.

I'd assume someone would be more likely to pull a knife than a gun. A knife is easier to carry and hide plus it's quiet. You don't have to point and shoot it either, you just stab which can be done quite inconspicuously. Shooting gives a reasonable opportunity to be missed assuming it's not point blank so they have distance and can get away easier, where as nobody is going to throw a knife at you. They're going to walk right up to you and jab you, likely a bunch of times, and are unlikely to miss. I'd rather have a gun to defend against a gun than a knife to defend against a knife. Being totally defenseless is a bad situation all around, unless you're well trained.

Less guns doesn't necessarily look to mean a great reduction either though. Like with the schools, it seems many problems need to be dealt with at once.

The reason that the effect of local laws is limited is because of how easily guns can travel from areas with weaker gun laws. If those areas don't have weaker gun laws, that problem is solved.

The rest of your post is baffling. Like, you argue that you can miss with a gun if you're not point blank, but somehow ignore that stabbing someone is much harder when they are out of arms reach. The whole thing is just such a ridiculous premise that is refuted by every ounce of our reality that I can't imagine it is being made in entirely good faith. 

I would like to ask you this: What is your solution to the problem of mass shootings and general violence/crime?