If gun bans legitimately increased public safety why do areas with the strictest bans have the highest crime rates?

[Sixgunsound]

Anyone? Bueller?

[Agape93]

Bans don't do shit unless the total culture changes. Japan can get away with it because they have a very different gun and social culture. We, do not, so a gun ban will never work.

I'll be dammed if some fuckwit takes away my means of defending myself, just so they can feel safer at a fucking coffee shop.

[Sixgunsound]

I look at it as if you don’t want one don’t get one, but stop trying to rob me to make yourself feel better.

[Agape93]

Exactly

[purplepoppy]

I know Jack shit about this so forgive my logic. But if a place has a crime problem surely the last thing you do is increase the number of guns in circulation. It seems to me that increasing restrictions would be a response to increasing crime rates and not the cause of them.

[Sixgunsound]

In the US, places where law abiding citizens can get licensed and registered guns after passing a background check tend to have lower crime rates because it is not as easy to victimize the population there. Places which announce to would-be violent criminals that an area is full of safe easy marks that can’t defend themselves draw that group to them like moths to a flame. Government officials, surrounded by tax funded guns, are the height of hypocrisy when they try to get guns away from the citizens who for whatever reason have to live in these ‘blue’ areas when those officials will not experience the consequences of their elitist policy decisions. Gun control is racist, classist, and tyrannical, and only benefits the assholes surrounded by guns paid for by the people who the beneficiaries of those guns won’t allow to have their own.

[Sixgunsound]

Imagine if a misogynist pig tried to assault you and you had the ability to save not only your own life and dignity by ending the threat, but that of other women as well? Wouldn’t that be more empowering than what the UK is currently telling women, run and hide because eventually (possibly?) big daddy government will rescue you oh damsel in distress?

[purplepoppy]

I don't follow that logic. Women often make false rape accusations so it follows you could shoot pretty much any guy and claim he tried to assault you.

[Sixgunsound]

That’s why there would still be a trial.

[purplepoppy]

Hard for a guy to defend himself with a bullet in his head

[Sixgunsound]

Shooters are responsible for everything that comes out of their guns, which will come out at trial. It’s not a perfect system, but the threat of trial plus the background checks to sort out the angry, vengeful, or mentally unstable are the best balance possible that respects public safety and public rights for all people.

[Sixgunsound]

I think it’s bs that I was able to get a permit with little issue because of where I live and my identifying demographics. The people who are more likely to die in gun violence don’t live where I do or look like me, but my state government makes it significantly more difficult for them to get guns because of them thinking that making the law abiding people defenseless is going to make criminals who by definition don’t obey gun laws suddenly develop sufficient honor and integrity to realize that bringing guns to a shouting match or even a knife fight isn’t very sporting. This is an example of feel-good ivory tower solutions not working out in the realities lived by people who aren’t champagne socialists. I’m not saying that is you, I’m just saying that the policy makers tend to be who implement these decisions.

[Shamalien]

It’s easy to lie. Most people will lie. Most people won’t shoot someone in cold blood though, only children and insane people or assassins do this

[Lliam]

I agree with everything she said.

There is no evidence that more guns = more rapes, robberies, assaults or murders. More guns doesn't even lead to more firearm related crime.

There IS evidence that guns in the hands of honest citizens deters crime.

Those AR-15s they talk about may be used in 200 homicides a year, but they are the most popular hunting platform, and they can be useful for self defense.

The goal of the wealthy and powerful elites who fund the "gun control" effort isn't to reduce crime and violence. They don't give a damn about mere commoners. Their actual and only goal is to restrict the commoner's access to firearms. Period.

Let me say it again. Their goal is NOT to save lives. It is to eliminate second amendment rights, by hook or by crook.

But they do have all the money in the world to create astroturf "gun control" organizations, hire lobbyists, fund expensive ads, and create the highest quality propaganda.

[Sixgunsound]

Bare hands are the most common murder weapon, is the government going to dis-ARM everybody next in the name of our own safety of course?

[Anonymous]

https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/canadian-police-say-10-killed-15-injured-stabbings-saskatchewan-2022-09-04/

[Snakeyes7]

Some argue that it is because guns are being brought in from out of the gun free zone, which shouldn't matter because killing someone not in self defense is already illegal.

[jshm2]

Because muricans are fucking stupid, and feel the need to carry a gun regardless.

[Agagagagaga]

www.reuters.com/.../

I bet they wish they had some guns. 🤷‍♂️

[Sixgunsound]

@jshm2 Someone who demonstrates their stupidity by unwarranted childish name calling, and has insufficient ability to read or even consume media about the gun debate going on in America, can be safely ignored as they have nothing worthwhile to contribute to the conversation.

[Shamalien]

@Agagagagaga yeah seriously…

[BarryLiverstone]

Those areas often have the highest numbers of people living in them often in lower economic areas.

[Lliam]

True. The FBI says that 80% of gun violence is gang related. That means that in 2021, there were only 4,000 or so non-gang related homicides. Out of 450 million people in the country at any one time, and over 80 million honest gun owners.

So what is the solution to gang violence?

[BarryLiverstone]

Gang violence is too complex to solve simply. But I’d say eduction, family structure, and more opportunities are a start.

You agree?

[Lliam]

Absolutely. Poverty and lack of resources, for sure. And something should be done about the failed war on drugs. Drugs are the most profitable industry, just like booze during prohibition. There has to be a way to take the profit out of drugs to put the importers and dealers out of business. It's not just the drugs, themselves, but also the penalty for getting caught with them that ruins millions of lives. I think we need a new plan.

[Sixgunsound]

@Lliam a lot of the non physical problems for people involved with drugs stem from them being illegal. It is in the governments as well as the for profit prison industrial complex interest that drugs remain illegal because they make soooooo much money and can legally wreck minority communities. I’d say legalize all of it, allow health insurances a self harm release clause, legalize self defense nationwide, and let Darwin sort it out.