Is owning Guns good or bad?

[lilithu]

The liberals should also consider that hunting licenses and gun purchases are one of the largest sources of funding for state wildlife agencies. Hunting licenses fund the budgets for the state fish and wildlife agencies. Taxes on arms and ammunition are used for wildlife restoration projects and hunter education. Duck stamps are used to purchase wetlands for wildlife. Google Pittman-Robertson Act for more information.

Some of us liberals do consider that. I am all in favor of responsible, regulated hunting. Hunters are our best allies in terms of supporting the environment. They provide funding through licenses AND they know better than anyone the effects that environmental degradation are having. If liberals could get over our self-righteous and irrational anti-hunting thing, we would have a huge and powerful ally in terms of lobbying for environmental issues. Instead, we fight about hunting, which has absolutely nothing to do with gun crime in city streets. These are separate issues and should not be lumped together.

 

[PureX]

It's sad the whenever someone mentions gun control, the gun lobby immediately interpret that as taking everyone's guns away. They insist on portraying all gun control efforts in the most extreme way, and then site instances of little old ladies being beaten and robbed by roving bands of thugs as though giving her the right to carry an automatic machine gun would have been the logical solution to the problem.

It's idiotic.

The problem isn't the guns, and it isn't the responsible gun owners. The problem is idiots and criminals possessing and using guns. So when we talk about gun control, we need to talk about ways that will help us keep guns out of the hands of idiots and criminals. And we can't do that when the gun lobby immediately jumps to foolish extremes.

 

[Lindsey-Loo]

Well, since it seems we have gotten into the hunting animals subject, I guess I'll jump right in here.

I believe hunting for pleasure is wrong. I believe you need to eat, or make some use of whatever you kill. I would say that gas-guzzling SUVs and residencial home builders are a far greater killer of animals in my area than hunters have ever, or will ever, be.

 

[jmaster78]

This is a pretty basic rule of gun saftey. I don't store my ammunition, clips and weapons together. I know people who keep their clips in safe deposit boxes in the bank.

I take it these people don't keep the guns for protection? 'i'm sorry Mr Burgler, can you come back tomorrow when i've had a chance to get my ammo from the bank.'

there are still quite a few people posting with comments like 'guns are fine in the right hands.' i will repeat my point, what happens when someone else gets their hands on your gun? I will avoid the hunting issue as i have a supermarket near by, and my idea of fun doesn't involve shooting a mother deer and leaving her young doe to starve to death. You can use clever word play to say what you like about my biased opinions on guns and my unfair generalisations of RF members, but i will never see guns as positive and gun owners as justified. call it a sob story but my dad was a police officer for 30 years in northern ireland during the troubles, he watch many good honest innocent coleagues get shot dead, he himself was shot and critically injured. the guns used were perfectly legal at one point! when you finish with your guns will you destroy them? no you'll sell them on and eventually they will fall into the wrong hands. as before todays legal guns become tomorrows illegal guns. so lets all stock up with our rifle under the bed, our .38 in the glove box and a Berretta in our shoulder strap when we go to the super market, that way we can have even more thugs and robbers armed to the teeth in the future.....face it when guns are involved the only people who benefit in the long run are the makers. i'm sure Mr smith and Mr Wesson are delighted with this thread!

 

[Radio Frequency X]

The problem is idiots and criminals possessing and using guns. So when we talk about gun control, we need to talk about ways that will help us keep guns out of the hands of idiots and criminals.

We already have measures that address these issues. What more do you want? Longer waiting periods, stricter regulations on who can own a gun, higher taxes on ammo? Most of the time, new gun control measures are aimed at hand guns, which defeats the purpose of concealed weapons permits. You can't conceal a rifle. It's just the latest way in which liberals have gone after gun ownership - and it isn't about gun control - its about systematically removing them from law abiding citizens and forcing them to be dependent upon the government for their protection. And is there anyone who doubts that law enforcement is often easily corrupted? This isn't going to extremes. Its a very serious issue and I don't hear anyone bringing up steps to make gun ownership safer, or to protect us from criminals getting guns, in this thread.

 

[Lindsey-Loo]

there are still quite a few people posting with comments like 'guns are fine in the right hands.' i will repeat my point, what happens when someone else gets their hands on your gun? I will avoid the hunting issue as i have a supermarket near by, and my idea of fun doesn't involve shooting a mother deer and leaving her young doe to starve to death. You can use clever word play to say what you like about my biased opinions on guns and my unfair generalisations of RF members, but i will never see guns as positive and gun owners as justified. call it a sob story but my dad was a police officer for 30 years in northern ireland during the troubles, he watch many good honest innocent coleagues get shot dead, he himself was shot and critically injured. the guns used were perfectly legal at one point! when you finish with your guns will you destroy them? no you'll sell them on and eventually they will fall into the wrong hands. as before todays legal guns become tomorrows illegal guns. so lets all stock up with our rifle under the bed, our .38 in the glove box and a Berretta in our shoulder strap when we go to the super market, that way we can have even more thugs and robbers armed to the teeth in the future.....face it when guns are involved the only people who benefit in the long run are the makers. i'm sure Mr smith and Mr Wesson are delighted with this thread!

Fact is, the "wrong hands" as you put it, will ALWAYS be able to find guns, or other lethal weapons. That's why they're criminals. If guns were illegal or whatever, law-abiding citizens like my dad would get rid of them, but do you honestly believe a law against guns will stop a criminal? HEL-LO!!!:shout Of course it's not. Instead, it will just leave the law-abiding citizens helpless against the criminals.

 

[standing_alone]

I'm a late-comer to this thread, but I hope it's still okay that I answer the questions in the OP:

Do you think owning guns is good or bad. (generally).

I don't think it is good or bad. The people owning the guns can do things that are good with them (defend themselves, hunt, sport shoot, etc.) or do things that are bad with them (commit crime, murder, etc.). This doesn't make guns themselves a bad thing.

Would you personally ever own a gun? why?

We used to have a couple of guns for hunting, but got rid of them since no one in my family hunts anymore. I don't know if I would ever personally own a gun since I don't hunt (don't have the money/resources). Since I don't find much of a reason to own a gun since I do not hunt or sport shoot and concealed-carry isn't allowed in Wisconsin, there's not much of a point for me to have one, though crime/gangs in my city is apparantly on the rise.

Is an armed populace good or bad? Does it protect against despotism?

Probably depends on the "culture" or attitudes of the populace. I think it is the populace's right to own guns, though I think certain legislation surrounding guns/gun control isn't bad, such as waiting periods/background checks and trigger locks and those things. The Founding Father's recognized the right to bear arms largely in order for the populace to protect themselves against tyrranical government. For this reason alone, I find it necessary that the people have the right to own guns.

 

[ch'ang]

It's called a "black market" because it's illegal. If we were actually enforcing the laws against such markets (ie: the laws had some teeth), and passing laws that were based on common sense instead of emotionalism, we could eliminate many of our problems with gun violence.

The biggest problem America has with gun violence is that we as a people believe that violence is the first, best, and only solution to virtually every and all social dissagreement. This idea breeds gun violence, which in turn promotes the idea, which then breeds more gun violence still. It's a self-perpetuating cycle of violence. And the only way to stop it is to get the guns away from the idiots who believe that violence is the only way to solve a social problem.

I think if we would start with this as our goal, we could really begin to actually make some progress against gun violence. But this is exactly what the gun lobby does not want us to do, because in many cases they ARE the idiots to which I'm referring. And they don't want to give up their guns.

When will you people learn Prohibition never has and never will solve anything. It merely moves the guns to the black market where they are more readily available to "idiots" who use them for crime. And no matter what you may think increasing the penalties will not "eliminate many of our problems with gun violence" simply look at any other form of prohibition as an example.

 

[SoyLeche]

Probably depends on the "culture" or attitudes of the populace. I think it is the populace's right to own guns, though I think certain legislation surrounding guns/gun control isn't bad, such as waiting periods/background checks and trigger locks and those things. The Founding Father's recognized the right to bear arms largely in order for the populace to protect themselves against tyrranical government. For this reason alone, I find it necessary that the people have the right to own guns.

Freakonomics also mentioned that "A study of imprisoned felons showed that even before the Brady Act, only about one-fifth of the criminals had bought their guns through a licensed dealer."

I don't see waiting periods and background checks as a bad thing, but they aren't going to keep guns away from criminals. They are more useful in situations like these:

Homer: I would like to buy a gun please.
Dealer: There's a 3 day waiting period.
Homer: Oh, but I'm mad NOW!

 

[kateyes]

Quoted from PurEx:
"The biggest problem America has with gun violence is that we as a people believe that violence is the first, best, and only solution to virtually every and all social dissagreement. This idea breeds gun violence, which in turn promotes the idea, which then breeds more gun violence still. It's a self-perpetuating cycle of violence. And the only way to stop it is to get the guns away from the idiots who believe that violence is the only way to solve a social problem................The problem isn't the guns, and it isn't the responsible gun owners. The problem is idiots and criminals possessing and using guns. So when we talk about gun control, we need to talk about ways that will help us keep guns out of the hands of idiots and criminals. And we can't do that when the gun lobby immediately jumps to foolish extremes."


I thing you make some valid points--however I think it is important to remind everyone--- guns are not the only method of acting on violent impulses--if someone really want to kill another person--or act on thier violent tendencies--there are plenty of other options available to them. Knives, baseball bats, fists, feet (I have read on BBC online in the past years of several people being literally beaten to death), automobiles, bombs.................. I think it is unrealistic to think that controlling or limiting gun ownership--is going to prevent someone from acting on thier violent urges. If private gun ownership were banned and other weapons were used--would we then ban those weapons as well? The fact remains (I know this is a trite statement but it is true) "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." As a sideline I would like to point out that many of the statistics cited for gun deaths are somewhat misleading, most people tend to think of gun related deaths as being the result of violent acts and assume that any statistics bear that out. However many reports fail to distinguish between gun related murders, suicides and accidental deaths. This can lead to somewhat misleading figures and conclusions.

While I don't alway agree with the actions of the NRA(would that be the gun lobby you are referring to)--the fact remains they are safeguarding one of the basic rights guaranteed us in the the Constitution of the United States, and an idiot who feels free to act on any and every violent impulse they feel--will act on those feelings--with whatever weapon available. Stricter gun controls would not necessarily logically lead to a decrease in gun related crimes.

 

[lilithu]

I will avoid the hunting issue as i have a supermarket near by, and my idea of fun doesn't involve shooting a mother deer and leaving her young doe to starve to death.

Oh yeah, you certainly avoided the hunting issue alright. You see the violence of the gunshot that kills a deer (who may or may NOT have a doe who is unable to feed itself. More likely NOT.) What about the systematic violence commited against the animals that end up as meat in your local supermarket?

You can use clever word play to say what you like about my biased opinions on guns and my unfair generalisations of RF members, but i will never see guns as positive and gun owners as justified. call it a sob story but my dad was a police officer for 30 years in northern ireland during the troubles, he watch many good honest innocent coleagues get shot dead, he himself was shot and critically injured. the guns used were perfectly legal at one point! when you finish with your guns will you destroy them? no you'll sell them on and eventually they will fall into the wrong hands. as before todays legal guns become tomorrows illegal guns. so lets all stock up with our rifle under the bed, our .38 in the glove box and a Berretta in our shoulder strap when we go to the super market, that way we can have even more thugs and robbers armed to the teeth in the future.....face it when guns are involved the only people who benefit in the long run are the makers. i'm sure Mr smith and Mr Wesson are delighted with this thread!

Your arguments are 90% ad hominems and hyperbole.

Yes, there is gun violence. What is it that causes people to resort to such violence?? Simply attacking guns without addressing the social issues that underly gun violence is short-sighted and doomed to failure.

Let me say that I do not own a gun. And I probably never will own one because I don't have enough interest in owning one. But the fact that comprehend or jonny or others own guns does not cause me any concern whatsoever. What scares me is that there are people out there who are so disenfranchised by society that they feel they have nothing to lose by resorting to gun violence. That's what I would like to see us address.

And for the record, when you no longer want a gun, there are places where they can be turned in where they will be melted down. "Thugs and robbers" do not aquire their guns from the left-overs of gun-owning citizens. If you took away all the guns from people who are legally authorized to carry them, "thugs and robbers" would still have theirs.

 

[jmaster78]

Oh yeah, you certainly avoided the hunting issue alright. You see the violence of the gunshot that kills a deer (who may or may NOT have a doe who is unable to feed itself. More likely NOT.) What about the systematic violence commited against the animals that end up as meat in your local supermarket?


Your arguments are 90% ad hominems and hyperbole.

Yes, there is gun violence. What is it that causes people to resort to such violence?? Simply attacking guns without addressing the social issues that underly gun violence is short-sighted and doomed to failure.

Let me say that I do not own a gun. And I probably never will own one because I don't have enough interest in owning one. But the fact that comprehend or jonny or others own guns does not cause me any concern whatsoever. What scares me is that there are people out there who are so disenfranchised by society that they feel they have nothing to lose by resorting to gun violence. That's what I would like to see us address.

And for the record, when you no longer want a gun, there are places where they can be turned in where they will be melted down. "Thugs and robbers" do not aquire their guns from the left-overs of gun-owning citizens. If you took away all the guns from people who are legally authorized to carry them, "thugs and robbers" would still have theirs.

being vetetarian i couldn't say what happens to meat in supermarkets before or after sale, it was just an example to show that guns are not a necessity for obtaining meat.

and i agree with you that the gun is not directly the problem. a gun is an inanemate object, guns can't hate. but until it is compulsory to brainwash all of society into loathing guns, the only other option is to remove them from society altogether. As illegal gun owners are arrested, their guns are removed from society. and eventually all guns will be removed from the streets. this would work in theory but while america insists on arming itself with newer guns, the thugs and robbers have an endless supply of weaponry.
americans buy guns legally, guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, GET THE PICTURE?
It would be interesting to see how many guns are 'melted down' compared to new guns sold every year. somehow i doubt the figures line up. and before you say something like 'if you removed all guns then they'd just use knives' personally i reacon yu would survive a knife in the gut better than a bullet in the forehead. and you need to be alot closer to use a knife.

 

[jmaster78]

Fact is, the "wrong hands" as you put it, will ALWAYS be able to find guns, or other lethal weapons. That's why they're criminals. If guns were illegal or whatever, law-abiding citizens like my dad would get rid of them, but do you honestly believe a law against guns will stop a criminal? HEL-LO!!!:shout Of course it's not. Instead, it will just leave the law-abiding citizens helpless against the criminals.

uh HEL-LO! you really don't seem to be getting the point. while americans continue to buy guns, they continue to provide the criminals with guns. if you stop buying guns then the gunsmiths will go out of business, then the manufacturers will go out of business. when you get too old to shoot or you move to a safer part of town and no longer need a gun, then destroy it. this will stop it falling into the wrong hands. as the police seize more and more illegal guns the number in circulation will fall, until eventually you will have the same number of guns on the street as a normal society. At which point the number of gun related crimes will also decrease to that of a normal society.

it really is that simple. and please, no childish comments about knives etc. guns are the most efficient weapon for causing fatal injuries.

 

[lilithu]

As illegal gun owners are arrested, their guns are removed from society. and eventually all guns will be removed from the streets. this would work in theory but while america insists on arming itself with newer guns, the thugs and robbers have an endless supply of weaponry.

Let me see... as illegal drug users are arrested, their drugs are removed from society and eventually all drugs will be removed from the streets. Is it working?? Why not? We made it illegal. We keep arresting people. Where is it still coming from?

americans buy guns legally, guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, americans buy more guns to counteract, more guns fall into illegal hands, GET THE PICTURE?

I get the picture that you are painting but it's not one of reality. As I and others have said, "illegal hands" do not aquire their guns from legal gun-owning citizens. Perhaps a few are aquired that way but most are not. If you took away all the guns from law-abiding citizens, criminals would still have access to guns.

And you know what? Many Americans may say that they are buying guns in order to counteract the guns owned by criminals. For some that may be true. But I also know a lot of Americans who just own guns because they like guns. I know people who target practice for a hobby. They get a sense of pride from their skill. You paint a picture of a downward spiral of fear. There is a little truth to that but it's not the whole picture.

 

[PureX]

Quoted from PurEx:
"The biggest problem America has with gun violence is that we as a people believe that violence is the first, best, and only solution to virtually every and all social disagreement. This idea breeds gun violence, which in turn promotes the idea, which then breeds more gun violence still. It's a self-perpetuating cycle of violence. And the only way to stop it is to get the guns away from the idiots who believe that violence is the only way to solve a social problem................The problem isn't the guns, and it isn't the responsible gun owners. The problem is idiots and criminals possessing and using guns. So when we talk about gun control, we need to talk about ways that will help us keep guns out of the hands of idiots and criminals. And we can't do that when the gun lobby immediately jumps to foolish extremes."


I thing you make some valid points--however I think it is important to remind everyone--- guns are not the only method of acting on violent impulses--if someone really want to kill another person--or act on thier violent tendencies--there are plenty of other options available to them. Knives, baseball bats, fists, feet (I have read on BBC online in the past years of several people being literally beaten to death), automobiles, bombs..................

Yes, but none of these options are even remotely as easy, fast, and effective as a simple hand gun. Many, many, many violent deaths would never have occurred if the killers had to use a knife, or a ball-bat, or their fists to commit the crime. Human beings are difficult to kill using these methods. They scream, they run, they fight back, and one or two 'applications' of a knife, bat or fist will not usually kill a person. The killer would have to chase after them and apply their deadly force multiple times.

To use this as any sort of mitigating reason not to control handguns is simply irrational, and wildly unrealistic. Yes. people who are determined to kill other people will find a way to do so. But the vast majority of killing are not of that type. They are stupid, spur-of-the-moment actions that would never have occurred if a handgun was not present or very easily obtainable.

I think it is unrealistic to think that controlling or limiting gun ownership--is going to prevent someone from acting on thier violent urges.

Frankly, after your previous comment, I am seriously skeptical of what you consider unrealistic. I don't see how you can even begin to rationalize what is more realistic without considering what is more probable. The vast majority of violent killings in America occur through the use of hand guns. Very few people stab or beat other people to death. So it is far more probable that if we were to limit the number of hand guns in circulation, we would also limit the number of violent deaths.

If private gun ownership were banned and other weapons were used--would we then ban those weapons as well?

First of all, no one was suggesting that we ban all private gun ownership. I certainly wasn't. I was suggesting that the goal of 'gun control' is to keep guns out of the hands of idiots and criminals. Since most citizens are neither idiots nor criminals, I see no reason to ban all private gun ownership (once again, the gun lobby always jumps to this extreme interpretation so as to end the discussion before it begins).

The fact remains (I know this is a trite statement but it is true) "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

The fact also remains, that hand guns make killing another human being many times easier than it would otherwise have been using any other weapon. Especially for an untrained, drunk, drugged up, or otherwise unstable killer, which describes most of the people who kill other people in America.

As a sideline I would like to point out that many of the statistics cited for gun deaths are somewhat misleading, most people tend to think of gun related deaths as being the result of violent acts and assume that any statistics bear that out. However many reports fail to distinguish between gun related murders, suicides and accidental deaths. This can lead to somewhat misleading figures and conclusions.

True, but in the end, "stupid is as stupid does". It does make sense, I think, to include accident and suicide among the category of deaths caused by idiots with guns. After all, as I have already stated, the problem is not the gun, and is not the responsible people who own them. The problem is the idiots who own them. And this is the problem that effective gun control practitioners will need to address. So these are the stats we need to be looking at.

While I don't always agree with the actions of the NRA(would that be the gun lobby you are referring to)--the fact remains they are safeguarding one of the basic rights guaranteed us in the the Constitution of the United States, and an idiot who feels free to act on any and every violent impulse they feel--will act on those feelings--with whatever weapon available. Stricter gun controls would not necessarily logically lead to a decrease in gun related crimes.

Normally, I would be behind a citizens right to be an idiot. But not when it comes to the owning and use of deadly weapons. There is a very good reason that we don't let blind people, drunks, the mentally retarded, etc., drive automobiles or fly airplanes. It's not that they don't have the "right" to do these things. As citizens, they have as much a right to drive or fly as anyone else, does. It's that they don't have the ability to do it safely. And I think we need to treat the use of deadly weapons in the same way. We need to find ways of identifying people who are not capable of owning and using deadly weapons safely and properly. And then we need to stop them from doing so. It's not a question of their "rights", it's a question of their ability, and of public safety.

I propose that ANYONE in this country who wants to own and CARRY a deadly weapon should be allowed to do so. But before they can do so, they should have to take a very involved test, proving that they are able to do so safely, legally, and properly. This test would be very similar to the tests that our police men and women take, and would involve extensive legal training in when it is allowable to brandish a deadly weapon, and when it's allowable to pull the trigger. It would also involve psychological testing to weed out those unstable folks who tend to gravitate toward positions and implements of power. And it would also involve repeated testing in proficiency and accuracy in the actual use of the weapons one wishes to own. But as long as a citizen is willing to take the training, and can pass the tests, I believe he or she should have the right to both own and carry guns on their person. And I will be standing right next to them on the darkened subway platform.

As for those who can't take the training or pass the tests, no guns for them. And if they get caught with one (of course, being idiots, they will tend to disregard the laws) we should impose very tough fines and sentences. So tough as to even cause an idiot to think twice. This STILL will not stop some of them from getting a gun and using it to commit a crime. But it will certainly cut down on the numbers of idiots who do this, and there will be a whole lot of well armed and trained citizens out there who know exactly how to deal with them when they do.

 

[jmaster78]

Let me see... as illegal drug users are arrested, their drugs are removed from society and eventually all drugs will be removed from the streets. Is it working?? Why not? We made it illegal. We keep arresting people. Where is it still coming from?


I get the picture that you are painting but it's not one of reality. As I and others have said, "illegal hands" do not aquire their guns from legal gun-owning citizens. Perhaps a few are aquired that way but most are not. If you took away all the guns from law-abiding citizens, criminals would still have access to guns.

And you know what? Many Americans may say that they are buying guns in order to counteract the guns owned by criminals. For some that may be true. But I also know a lot of Americans who just own guns because they like guns. I know people who target practice for a hobby. They get a sense of pride from their skill. You paint a picture of a downward spiral of fear. There is a little truth to that but it's not the whole picture.

The drugs come from outside america, the guns come from within. on a serious note, of the number of people that commit gun related crime, roughly what percentage legally owned the guns they used? i would imagine gang members with long criminal records have trouble getting their hands on guns legally.

 

[Quoth The Raven]

...as the police seize more and more illegal guns the number in circulation will fall, until eventually you will have the same number of guns on the street as a normal society. At which point the number of gun related crimes will also decrease to that of a normal society.

it really is that simple. and please, no childish comments about knives etc. guns are the most efficient weapon for causing fatal injuries.

Yes, it really is that simple, except for the fact that when we relatively recently had a period for people to turn in their previously legal automatic and semi automatic weapons for cash - into the police,who were supposed to destroy them - gues what happened. Can ya guess? I bet ya can't. Some of those guns ended up in the hands of criminals and were used in the commission of crimes.
But, but, they were given to the police. Yep, it's real simple alright.
You've yet to explain why the Swiss - with a gun in every house - aren't on the news every night with their newest shooting rampage. It'd be nice if you'd have a bash at explaining that...simply of course, because none of us is apparently too bright.
Oh, and by the way. Since our gun laws became much strict, the number of knife attacks has risen sharply, to the point where people who collect swords are required to have a permit. Funny thing is, I'm still allowed to have a collection of razor sharp blades in my kitchen - some of which are up to 12 inches long - without telling a soul. Apparently - I was told once by a security expert - the biggest killer here during disturbed robberies are the knives people have in their own kitchens. But obviously the martial arts crowd and serious collectors are in far more need of regulation.

 

[SoyLeche]

The drugs come from outside america, the guns come from within. on a serious note, of the number of people that commit gun related crime, roughly what percentage legally owned the guns they used? i would imagine gang members with long criminal records have trouble getting their hands on guns legally.

The drugs come from outside of america because they can't be grown/processed here as easily. If we were somehow to stop all gun manufacture in the U.S. they would soon be coming from outside the U.S. too. Here's a basic rule of thumb for you - if there is a demand for something, someone will supply it.

I already answered your other question - before the Brady Bill, less than 1/5 of criminals were buying guns from licensed dealers. I would imabine the fraction is much smaller now.

 

[lilithu]

The drugs come from outside america, the guns come from within.

What Soy Leche said.

on a serious note, of the number of people that commit gun related crime, roughly what percentage legally owned the guns they used? i would imagine gang members with long criminal records have trouble getting their hands on guns legally.

Why in the world would you think that gang members with long criminal records have trouble getting guns? They didn't buy them legally in the first place before they got the criminal record. Why would they be trying to buy them legally after the criminal record? I'm not trying to be mean, but it seriously boggles my mind that you think making something illegal will make it harder for criminals to get it. They're not playing by the rules. That's why they're considered criminals.

 

[jmaster78]

Yes, it really is that simple, except for the fact that when we relatively recently had a period for people to turn in their previously legal automatic and semi automatic weapons for cash - into the police,who were supposed to destroy them - gues what happened. Can ya guess? I bet ya can't. Some of those guns ended up in the hands of criminals and were used in the commission of crimes.
But, but, they were given to the police. Yep, it's real simple alright.
You've yet to explain why the Swiss - with a gun in every house - aren't on the news every night with their newest shooting rampage. It'd be nice if you'd have a bash at explaining that...simply of course, because none of us is apparently too bright.
Oh, and by the way. Since our gun laws became much strict, the number of knife attacks has risen sharply, to the point where people who collect swords are required to have a permit. Funny thing is, I'm still allowed to have a collection of razor sharp blades in my kitchen - some of which are up to 12 inches long - without telling a soul. Apparently - I was told once by a security expert - the biggest killer here during disturbed robberies are the knives people have in their own kitchens. But obviously the martial arts crowd and serious collectors are in far more need of regulation.

You should destroy your guns yourself then??? don't kick yourself for not thinking about that, it took the guys a NASA ages to come up with this answer!

Your reply highlights a very curious/serious point about american mentality. Why do other nations have a gun in every house and still have a fraction of america's gun crime? maybe you should think about it seriously rather than using it as sarchasm. anything that helps explain america's gunho attitude is worth a listen. from there we can work out the many other dangerous delinquent aspects of the american psyche!

As for the Swiss....

Swiss concealed-handgun owners are required to have a permit and have to demonstrate to the authorities that they needed a weapon to protect themselves or others against a precise danger. (where as in america you can carry a gun 'just incase.')
Swiss Militia must keep their weapon at home (not in the glove box or handbag for sporadic use or be stolen)
Swiss militia have their weapons and ammo inspected regularly. so it is all accounted for.
Swiss militia must purchase their own personal ammo from a shooting range and must use it up at the range.
Swiss know that Hollywood films should not be used as templets for real life.
Swiss place a higher value on life.

Yes you are allowed razor sharp knives in your kitchen, IN YOUR KITCHEN, not in a houlster under your arm.