begonebee
Asked by begonebee
2 years ago
QUESTION:

If guns were banned, would murder rates decrease?

Just curious...
Click to vote and we'll show you the results.
This question was: Great Confusing Inappropriate


300 votes




Comments (26)
report spam
2 years ago
Look at countries that have strict gun laws, yes they have lower numbers of deaths related to guns.
reply
like
(0)
report spam
2 years ago
True story. But thats becuase guns have never been legal there. There are so many guns in circulation in the US. You can never take them away. Banning guns will mean that criminals are the only ones that remain armed.
reply
like
(2)
report spam
2 years ago
Yes, there are plenty of guns already in circulation in the U.S. but don't you think that's the problem? I wonder what percentage of legal guns fall into the hands of the wrong people?

reply
like
(0)
report spam
2 years ago
I think the wrong people are people who isn't the police enforcement and that's a lot.
reply
like
(0)
report spam
2 years ago
Me thinks the gun laws in our country are being protected for a very small set of people who want to stock pile weapons.
reply
like
(2)
report spam
2 years ago
What I am saying is that the guns are already there. If the government says "Time to turn in your guns"...how many are actually going to be turned in? Sure guns are registered, but its easy to say oh I sold it... These "wrong people" will always get guns whether they are legal or not, and there are too many out there now to take them away.
reply
like
(4)
report spam
2 years ago
YES it would. plain and simple.
reply
like
(0)
report spam
2 years ago
I think I understand your question better now. It probably wouldn't have an affect on murder rates in the short term, but slowly but surely in the long term as more guns are taken off the street murder rates will decrease.

This question you ask is timely for me. I kid you not someone was gunned down at 4:30p just yesterday less than 100 yards from my apartment. He was at a restaurant with his family. I do believe the guns are the problem. We need to restrict them to law enforcement because people can't be trusted with guns.
reply
like
(1)
report spam
2 years ago
I think this is absolutely wrong and ridiculous. People absolutely can be trusted with guns. Just the same way as they can be trusted with other dangerous thing. Unfortunately accidents do happen, but in the case of murder the gun was not the problem - it was the man doing the murdering.
reply
like
(1)
report spam
2 years ago
People kill people...not guns. Murders, in a screwed up way, are a part of life. Banning guns will decrease murders with a guns...but there will be an increase in other forms of violence with different weapons. Do we start banning other things that can kill too? It is an endless cycle. We as a civilization just need to ask..."Why can't we just all get along?"
reply
like
(2)
report spam
2 years ago
@F171615 Ok let's take it a little more extreme then. If people can be trusted with guns, can they be trusted with nuclear weapons? Do you trust humans to have those?

@Alano I do believe "people kill people" but them having guns makes it easier, more brutal, more final, and more people get hit in the crossfire.

Maybe my stance is more: If guns were banned, murder rates probably would not decrease, but murder rates where the use of a gun would drop overtime.
reply
like
(1)
report spam
2 years ago
@ stergeron:
I believe ideally that of course people could be trusted with anything (considering the person is of sound mind and all that other stuff). But to compare guns to nuclear weapons is unfair since one is a weapon of mass destruction vs the other being a tool in so many different ways.

and as for murder rates, i think guns make murders easier and so do drive up murder rates. people probably would not murder as often if it was more difficult for them.
reply
like
(1)
report spam
2 years ago
@Stergeron, I hope we can trust people with nuclear weapons...Or the earth would of been blown up a couple times over now. I would also argue that guns actually make it less brutal. Quick swift death as oppose to being stabbed to death. But I do agree that the problem with guns is the collateral damage.
reply
like
(0)
report spam
2 years ago
You would see a decrease in crime rates in the long term. As far as the problem of guns already being here, the deterrent would be simple. Raise the incentive to NOT use them. Eg, if you are caught with a firearm, it is an automatic 10-year sentence. Extreme example, I know, but these types of deterrents are the ones that work.

Despite all this, the discussion is mute. Right to bear arms is protected in our bill of rights.
reply
like
(1)
report spam
2 years ago
Sorry, but hiding behind a prehistoric law would doom us all. Times change and laws should be revamped and rewritten along with the change. Technology evolve, the way people think changes, so why shouldn't laws?
reply
like
(1)
report spam
2 years ago
Changing and/or ignoring rights given to the people explicitly in the Bill of Rights is a very scary proposition.
reply
like
(0)
report spam
2 years ago
It probably is but one day, a new legislation will arise when Americans have finished killing themselves leaving behind a brand new government. (yeah that's a little extreme)
reply
like
(0)
report spam
1 year ago
Really? The extreme consequences like death sentences and life imprisonment haven't seemed to deter the rate of murders...could you give another example of "these types of deterrents are the ones that work."?
reply
like
(0)
report spam
2 years ago
Would the police be banned from using guns too?
reply
like
(0)
report spam
2 years ago
I'm trying to think of when prohibition has been a success. I guess it all depends on how you measure it. Because when America prohibited alcohol, yes alcohol consumption did decline - but the amount of other problems it caused certainly outweighed any decline in alcohol consumption. And the fact of the matter is, in all cases of prohibition of related type issues, I believe this has always been the case.
reply
like
(3)
report spam
2 years ago
No, banning guns would not decrease murders. Ya'll liberal wusses need to man up! We need weapons to protect our interests, freedom and ourselves. Otherwise, we would use swords!
reply
like
(0)
report spam
2 years ago
You guys should read the book 'Freakonomics' by Steven Levitt. It draws correlations on topics just like this one.
reply
like
(0)
report spam
2 years ago
no because if someone really wanted to murder someone they would find a way to do it with or without guns
reply
like
(0)
report spam
2 years ago
Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than all my guns combined.
reply
like
(0)
report spam
2 years ago
FACT: Even if they were banned. They would still be made and sold (ironic). Alike drugs.
reply
like
(0)
report spam
1 year ago
If someone is messed up enough to commit a murder guns or no...they'll find a way to get it done. We can ban all we want and stand on these issues as platforms but there will always be evil people...freedom allows for people to be free to be dumb and that has consequences.
reply
like
(0)
Login to comment.
Direct Link

Add this poll to your website

(Copy and paste the code below where HTML is accepted)

(5) Users Liked This Question