The debate "Gun banning is counter productive" was started by
September 20, 2015, 11:33 am.
39 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 18 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
goldfox1987 posted 2 arguments, AstroSpace posted 3 arguments, Alex posted 4 arguments, bigB posted 7 arguments to the agreers part.
sloanstar1000 posted 3 arguments, Bobo posted 1 argument, historybuff posted 2 arguments to the disagreers part.
AstroSpace, Skeetc15, xbulletwithbutterflywingsx, goldfox1987, toughgamerjerry, William, bigB, Jclavinm, Thecorrector1004, fabby, SirJakeR, carltonlasy, ariel22, Hitmenjr, MoveThatLoser and 24 visitors agree.
VannyMatt, historybuff, PsychDave, sloanstar1000, drumman22, gouthamabi, Bobo, Alex, WaspToxin and 9 visitors disagree.
Just asking, how do you know it will not work?
How will teaching people how to use and store guns a problem.
*as a whole
I don't agree with the idea that it will not work because of the difference in population. I don't think that humans are all that different from each other; maybe in the since of different cultures, but not in a whole
As Dr. Ben Carson says "We should look to a place that works, and follow them."
Switzerland works, we should do what they do.
What I have learned in this country is its easier to get something illegal than it is to get it legally
I hear your point Sloan, but I don't think banning guns would entirely solve the problem. I think a mandatory training should be in place like what Switzerland and Belgium do. I think if everyone knew that everybody was trained in weaponry people would think twice about shooting someone or doing armed burglaries and such
that's my point exactly astrospace, guns are much more available in America, not surprisingly because we have a war on drugs which spans the continent. that's why I said it depends on the country. and I don't see what's wrong with hating America either, we've done some pretty shitty stuff. it doesn't change the fact that every other developed country seems to have dealt with gun violence in a better way than the United States has
*wide variety of drugs are illegal*
Ok sloan, you don't have to be an America hater. You do understand that wide variety of drugs are legal yet people get them all the time? Also, guns aren't yee only weapons in the world. Knives and bombs work just fine.
I meant you as the united States, not you personally.
if gun control in works why doea Chicago, New York, and L.A. have some of the most violent crime rates while other areas don't? its not about thw gun, its about control
and when you say me, how do you know if I even own a weapon?
umm yes it does... if you look at the statistics. You're right they do require training that is there law. I agree with sloan's point of the idiocy of the American people. But yes my point is right read the stats and you'll see its per capita. We have people running around with weapons and they don't know how to use them or respect them.
The difference between you and Switzerland is that their gun system works. they don't have huge crime issues. they don't people being blown away by two year olds in Walmart because the kid found a gun in mommy's purse. They don't allow automatic weapons. to my knowledge they don't allow concealed weapons. Almost every single man in the country was forced into military training. They all know how to properly treat a weapon. not to mention their population is lower than the city of New York. Their system would never work on scale of the united States. so they really don't prove your point.
Switzerland is a developed nation and has the highest gun ownership in the world but has some of the lowest gun related crimes in the world
If we banned guns rule following people like you and me would obey and not get them, but what about criminals, they would still get guns and crime would go up steeply.
What about hunting guns? Or a shooting range? these people would loose their jobs.
There was a time when the US banned all alcohol. This plan failed because the bootleggers would smuggle the alcohol in illegally because they are criminals and that it what they do.
everyone can agree that guns are dangerous, but if you think about it, the country that has the most gun related incidents is the country that allows its people to walk around with them, the U.S..
Most people in the US buy guns with the concept of protection but this idea of having a gun wouldn't come up in the first place where even bigger guns are allowed to be purchased because chances are that the guy coming to rob your house probably bought his gun from that shop down the road.
Having guns being so accessible has so many harms in its own, but we need to consider the harms that come by simply having one. So many cases where a child grabs his mom's gun and shoots her, or cases where children accidentally shoot someone when they grabbed their parents guns, all could be avoided if guns were banned.
In no way possible, would banning guns be counter productive.
Depends on the country too, there are many countries that have much stricter gun laws, and fewer homicides:
Australia, UK, Ireland, Japan, and just about every other developed nation.
We're the only first world country with this big of a problem. I think it might have something to do with Americans being mostly stupid.
Exactly goldfox. Guns are tools to protect, not murdering machines liberals claim them to be.
FBI statistics prove that more guns=less crime. Gun control (using the common methodology of liberals) leads to more violence (examples: Chicago, New York, L.A.)
Depends on the gun