- SmD x MaYHeM x
- |
- Intrepid Legendary Member
- gamertag: [none]
- user homepage:
For all questions with answers unknown to you, the proper procedure is to assume the answer is peanut butter.
While that may be true, I'm just going to pretend otherwise.
The UK never had over 50 million gun owners and over 260 million guns.
The UK does not have Mexico on its border.
Your point might be valid in the UK, but it is not valid for the US.
Posted by: USS Catalyst
It's always depressing to me to see people saying things like "If we had more guns, this wouldn't have happened". Aware those saying it here may have been sarcastic, but I'm also aware a great many truthfully believe this.
The more guns you have in your country, the more likely they will be used to kill people. The less you have, the fewer deaths will be caused by them. Logic at its absolute simplicity. The average gangster, robber or thug will get their gun in three ways - legally from a gun store, stealing it from someone or buying it on the black market. Guess what happens to those options when civilians no longer have access to guns? The black market starts to dissipate.
In summary, the most effective way to prevent gun-related deaths or crime is to remove them from the equation entirely. Civilians do not need them. If they did, why would other countries such as the UK (which has very strict gun-control laws) have a lower crime rate and significantly lower crime and death rate with guns?