What's your view on gun control?

Question

I believe everyone should guns, lot of them. They are either going to kill you or your going to kill them.

Picture this: Man walks into a bank with a gun and tells everyone to the floor. Why because everyone is unarmed. Who is in control? The man with the gun. One man can control a hundred people with a gun. Now lets change that story around.

Man walks into a bank with gun and tells everyone to the floor. But no one moves, everyone pulls out their gun and points it at the robber. The customers tell the robber to lay down on the floor. Now who is in control? Yes, The public.

So government controls guns and the government controls us. What's going to control the government? See my point. This is why everyone needs to own a gun

Updates

+1 y

Give everyone a gun and the everyone would control everyone

true gun control, plus it would keep the government in control to

Screenwriter · Accepted Answer

This sounds overly paranoid.. I don't feel I live in the Wild West and i need a gun to leave my house, go to the grocery, drive in my car, enter the bank, walk the streets, be in my home.

I was mugged by a guy 44 years ago who had a gun and pistol whipped me with it telling me to keep quiet he had a gun. I fought him while he beat me and flipped him over my back causing him to drop the gun, I screamed and he ran off. So he WAS NOT in control. I did not need a gun to stop him, and we all do not need guns to stop criminals and crime.

That has been the sole incident of personal crime in my lifetime, except someone stole a plant off my front porch 27 years ago and 3 years ago broke my car window to rifle through my car and take my backpack, which had nothing in it.

Five to 10 percent of people are repeat criminals. A gun-wielding public does not solve the reasons people have resorted to crime. Education, social programs and care are the longterm solutions. Not guns for the public.

Programs for children in single-parent homes that engage them in sports, afterschool programs, mentor them in Big Brother, Big Sister scenarios, youth organizations, scouts, summer away camps, music camps.

Children who see themselves as valued and valuable want to contribute to society, not rob, rape and take out anger against it. And valued, valuable people see futures for themselves. Bright futures.

I'm a duck hunter. I own a shotgun. But the weapon beside my bed is a big crowbar. I want to whack somebody hard who might physically threaten me. But shoot someone over money? My car?

Statistics show that people who wield guns against criminals are most likely to be killed by them. Take the money and car. I want to live. And I sure don't want someone dead over those things.

Things are replaceable, but life is precious. I don't want to kill over stuff. Especially not the host of stupid kids who are currently being used by elders to perpetrate property crime.

TheSpicyWench · Accepted Answer

I go to the range as often as I can to make sure I have good control over my gun.

Lionman95 · Accepted Answer

I think it´s reasonable to a certain degree since not everybody that has the possibility to own a gun should own one.
There are cases where I understand that people prefer having a gun like if you live in the country side and it´s important can defend yourself.
But at the same time I don´t think that everyone should own because there are many narcissitic and insane people out there that when anyone can have a gun also will have weapons. To me a scenario where everyone has a gun doesn´t sound safe at all since any argument could turn into people shooting each other just because they can. It therefore would make not trust a person I don´t know and avoid them since anyone could be the next shooter no matter if I go shopping or to church.
Also in the scenario you describe if everybody owned a gun in the room someone would probably shoot anyways either the robber or some customer being the room. Why? The robber to intimate people the customer to stop the robber for good. So someone will get hurt for sure. So I think people should be able to own weapons but they have to prove that they are emotionally mature and responsible enough to use those weapons the right way since the damage they can create is huge and irreversible. Because either someone gets killed by them or it could lead to a nation becoming a police state since you put people with weapons litterally anywhere to avoid having a weak spot.

Bklynbadboy12 · Accepted Answer

That's why I'm never giving up my guns

NamerOfStars · Answer

You haven't thought your scenarios through.

Option one gives a fleeing criminal whose image and voice have been captured on camera, and who can be described by potentially dozens of witnesses, because he feels little compulsion to shoot people he knows won't be able to shoot him first.

Option two gives us a slaughterhouse: a criminal who's far more likely to open by shooting people, in an effort to cow the others into submission, and is more likely to kill anyone who shows signs of resistance or dissent, because any threat is potentially lethal. Why would any reasonable person try to rob a bank under those circumstances? They wouldn't- no more than they would risk the ire of the police by robbing a bank in general. It's the action of a desperate person, who's inherently dangerous. Assuming they don't start by opening fire, they'll have a crowd drawing down on them, and some nervous person shooting, possibly by accident, but since no one's going to know whether anyone else is secretly in on it with the robber, it's going to explode into a massive all-way gun battle.

The only thing more dangerous than an armed populace is an unarmed one- but that's in total, not in every situation.

echoaj · Answer

I think your example is oversimplified. While the idea of an armed public stopping a bank robber may seem plausible, real-life situations are often more chaotic and unpredictable. Studies have shown that people's accuracy and decision-making abilities can be significantly compromised in high-stress situations. Multiple armed individuals can lead to confusion, crossfire, and unintended harm to innocent bystanders. Trained law enforcement officers are equipped with the necessary expertise and experience to handle such situations more effectively.

Second, the notion that individual gun owners can keep the government in check is far from true. Modern governments possess advanced military capabilities that make it unlikely for private gun ownership alone to counter a tyrannical government. Armed citizens are not the ultimate defense against tanks, missiles, and drones.

Yes, gun control is necessary. In an island with a 100 people I rather have 0 guns on that island than 100 guns on that island.

MysticDevice · Answer

Every gun law is an infringement. And every law is enforced by the very guns the control advocates want banned. The politicians who scream for gun control are they themselves protected by security armed with those weapons.

The government does not get a monopoly on force. Anyone who believes the police will actually protect you is living in a fantasy. They can't protect you. They don't protect you. The governments don't actually care about you.

France has lost control of its own country. Canada and Australia use police to abuse their own citizens. Russia has gone rogue. China is exterminatimg some of its own citizens while bullying everyone of its neighbors into submission. Ukraine is handing out AK-74s to anyone who wants one where rights that should have been exercised decades ago are now handed out as a last resort.

Biden is arming the Taliban and flooding Europe with American made weapons while trying denying his own citizens' the right to keep theirs.

This isn't even an exaggeration and it's not paranoia. Anyone who payed attention these last 5 years will have seen everything I just mentioned.

I'll keep my guns. Thank you very much.

bolverk · Answer

As a Brit who lived/worked in the US for over ten years, all I can say is the US Justice Dept is aimed at the wrong people, the law alibiing firearms owners are not the ones causing the 'gun control' problems, the ATF, FBI, etc should be totally focused on criminals who are the ones behind black-market market in firearms in the US through theft, straw purchases, smuggling etc, But instead they focus on a 4oz lump of plastic and Velcro that has only one purpose to help stabilise AR/AK pistols, it does nothing to increase the rate of fire or increase the calibre or capacity of the pistol no matter the statement of a certain US President.

Over my ten years in the US I concealed carried for nine of those years, only drew three times, all on criminals in the middle of the act, with police not arriving on scene for over 10 minutes at the soonest,

In the UK you are effectively banned from owning a firearm of any type unless you 'have a good reason' and that is at the discretion of each county/forces Chief Constable, but the criminals are still obtaining firearms on the black-market via the criminal gangs in the EU.

mobiusforniner · Answer

I own a lot of guns, including two AKs and AR a few handguns and I think you're paranoid. If having a gun is needed for you to feel in "control", you're doing it wrong. You shouldn't be in a situation which requires you to need to use it. And if you feel like everywhere you go you need to have it, you have a small perspective on life. Not everyone is out to get you. I dont carry everywhere i go.

Problem with gun ownership, there's a lot of paranoid people who want the power to kill but do not know how to respect or harness that power. I have a relative who has no clue how their machine even works. Never even shot his gun. Yet he brags how he's in control and has power.

Nah, thats just little brain AND little dick syndrome.

reds-noro · Answer

Here in the Netherlands where guns are way less common it is better to keep guns banned. Your scenario is more likely to happen in a country where guns are already widely available than in a country where guns have neve really been allowed. You need a gun to protect yourself from people with a gun... But not giving people the chance to even attack you with a gun is more desirable in my eyes. So you Americans should continue to handle your guns with care while we Dutch avoid them entirely. Makes sense to me.

richardcory · Answer

Of the two bank scenarios , I'd prefer the 1st. The guy robs the bank - whatever that means these days, there isn't much money in bank vaults. He's recorded on cameras, as is his car. If he is robbing a bank he's probably such a moron that he forgot to turn off his cell phone. Police catch him, or if not the bank insurance pays.

In the 2nd scenario we have 50 people pointing guns. Some idiot, maybe the robber pulls the trigger. He goes down in a hail of bullets, probably along with another dozen people caught in the crossfire.

Is that really better.

Now if the people with guns are highly trained and certified. Are able to work out lines of fire and non-hardened partitions, then its fine. But the only people I want with guns are experts. Recurrent testing and training - just like I have to do with my airplane.

MustangGirl01 · Answer

Gun control as it is said, is not what we need. Controlling them is against our second amendment of the constitution. Besides, we could fix the issue if we just taught gun safety and punished those who break the law. Guns aren’t what kills people. Leave a gun alone by itself, it does nothing. People is what kills people. It’s like saying we need to outlaw spoons because they’re making people fat. No the spoon doesn’t do that. The person does. We’d have a much better control and much better public if it was required that EVERYONE carried a gun

BasedBaeBecca · Answer

I don't fully believe in this idea.
For me, owning guns is not the key to a safe society. Instead, we should focus on providing people with education and healthcare, and addressing the underlying issues that lead to violence in the first place.
Guns can be dangerous in the wrong hands, and can lead to unintended consequences.
It's true that there will always be some violence and crime in a society, but we should not resort to violence ourselves. Instead of using guns as a way to control the situation, we should explore other possible solutions that are safer and more effective in reducing crime and violence.

FunkyMonkee · Answer

We have it! What else could you want? No one but the gun owner can predict what they're gonna use their gun for and sometimes, not even them! We're doing everything (or damn near) that we can to keep it from happening but, things change over time! A guy that's incredibly meek and civil one day could, if provoked, become the next psych-killer at the drop of a hat! Nobody can preemptively know what will set off a potential shooter.
Getting rid of ALL the guns isn't gonna help much! At best, it might delay the inevitable.

blissinanarchy1 · Answer

Nothing will work. Pessimistic but realistic views. How do you stop gun violence? Get rid of ALL guns. Would that happen peacefully? Fuck no.

Only the right people should have weapons. But there’s no 100% accurate system. So sometimes the right people are denied, sometimes the wrong people get guns. People will have opposing views of who’s the right ones and who’s not.

Guns are also equalizers. Let’s put this into perspective. I’m a 6’3 240 pound man. And lets say I want to beat a small female to death. What will she realistically do? Nothing. A gun would save her though.

And open carry is only for the intellectually challenged.

ProbablyClueless · Answer

I'd rather we didn't have lots of guns floating around, but seeing how we DO; I'd like the sane people to have access to them too.

The thing about guns is that a good 95% of the people who shouldn't have them aren't going to be hindered by stricter gun laws because they aren't obtaining their guns through proper legal channels.

So basically, you have a bunch of law abiding people who you DO want carrying guns feeling like it's a complete pain in the ass to own their guns because some well-intentioned people are terrified of the people who shouldn't own guns being able to obtain guns without dealing with the laws the well-intentioned people put in place.

YesterdaysChild · Answer

This is my concern.

Guanfei · Answer

We have strict gun control here.

And as a result, only criminals have guns, we have riots where thousands of shops and cars are destroyed, hundreds of wounded people, and criminals openly bragging in the streets.

So you can say a lot about issues with guns in the US, but not having them cause us other issues.

Here, we say we have a "social contract" with the government. They keep us safe and keep the country running, and we don't try to beat the shit out of criminals ourselves. But lately the government is incapable of keeping us safe, which means that no one can help us in case of danger. Not even us, as it's forbidden to defend ourselves with equal or more force than the criminal have.

The way I see it, either the government is capable of keeping us all safe, or he isn't and the he should let us do that ourselves.

BoopBoopBeep · Answer

"Gun control" is a firm grip on your weapon.

A_Bell · Answer

The most basic human right is the right to defend yourself. Without it, you aren't really human anymore. The first step in dehumanizing people in slavery or despotism or rape is disarming them.

It is so crazy that people trust their anonymous government agents with guns but not their neighbors.

People must have never picked up a history anthology.

jennifer_bloom · Answer

I think it should have a minimum age and some personality limits such as people who have records of violence are not allowed guns, people who have been in detention as teenagers are not allowed guns, people who have been jailed for public intoxication are not allowed guns.

ZackBan · Answer

Fair take.

I always wonder what those who oppose guns would do when one is pointed at them or their loved ones.

Because end of the day getting a gun is not hard, even if outlawed a criminal will find one since he doesn't care about the law regardless and then you'll have a fox in a henhouse situation

normalice · Answer

I think using hypothetical sales pitches is dishonest. The fact is if we had universal background checks mass shootings would drop pretty quick. But, sadly, every time there is a mass shooting gun sales skyrocket, so the gun industry will never allow any of the politicians in their pocket to do that.

Alli39 · Answer

Not a fan. Countries with stricter gun control have much lower rates of gun violence, even when scaled for population differences.

Also I have never once felt that giving everyone a gun would help control the government. I don't even see how that would help.

RingOfFire · Answer

If guns are made illegal only criminals will have guns.

That pretty much says it all.

What is the point of passing laws against guns if criminals don't care about the law? DUH!

The places with the most gun laws also have the most violence using guns. It's not the guns it's the people who use them and the policies of the left that prevent the sane people from dealing with those people to get them off the streets.

girlzruleboyzdrool · Answer

I live in Canads and feel very safe and no need to have to have a gun.

We can get our gun license here and have one if needed.

We don't have school shootings, and waaay less murders here. We have gun control and it's a good thing.

We can still have guns, just have to get a license and pass to use them and register them.

DextroShade · Answer

The globohomo leftists calling for gun control are literally surrounded by men armed with guns while they do so. What they are really saying is "Only we should have access to this level of force, not you lowly peasants!" They can go fuck themselves.

Paige90 · Answer

Chicago has one of the strictest gun control laws in the country, How's that working out? I'll take Texas and Florida's law.

Tomisworthless · Answer

The argument is to save lives but gun grabbers don’t go for handguns because they are widely accepted so they are just carving away slowly and in time generations later the public through media influence will be brainwashed to give them all away. It’s a slow but long term game they are playing

Likes2drive · Answer

Doesn’t seem to be much control at all, no way everyone can walk around with one, but you never know who is mentally unstable who will use it against unarmed people. . Sort of like a balance of power if everyone is armed then there’s not going to be any mass shootings.

najekim · Answer

Gun control is is a 1" grouping at 10 yards. Not useless laws criminals ignore in the first place. In the words of Robert A Heinlein, "An armed society is a polite society."

Meropatrick · Answer

An armed society is a Civil one. When i know i can't harm you because u r armed and u know you can't harm me because i am too then less people will break the laws. But most western country do not want a strong population so they can screw the people easier

AaronKrieger · Answer

Teach your kids how to shoot from a young age and majority of them will respect the weapon. Hell, I haven't even shot a gun in six years, yet I still keep my finger away from the trigger on toy guns.

AviatorTom · Answer

Owning a gun (or not) is a personal decision. The US Constitution never said a person can own as many types of any number of gun as they want. Reasonable restrictions on gun ownership are appropriate.

Vazdan · Answer

Hitler took guns away from Jewish communities and then preceded to slaughter 6 million of them. Gun control is the path for the rich to slaughter the non-rich.

Bricealan · Answer

You want me to take my 60 caliber, belt fed, air cooled machine gun on tri-pod off of my roof?

goaded · Answer

How about: give everyone a gun with a single bullet with their social security number on it that can't be re-loaded without a court order. The masses have their deterrent, but they're not a significant danger to their fellow citizens.

exitseven · Answer

Enforce the laws that are already on the books first and then talk about making new ones. Giving mandatory 1 year jail to anyone in possession of a stolen or unregistered firearm will be good start.

John_Doesnt · Answer

The US has the most guns and the most gun deaths. Pretty obvious correlation. Only people who think the constitution is divine prophecy would support everyone having a gun "because it's in the constitution".

Drewtate · Answer

How about man walks into a bank with a flamethrower. I have guns and with all the crime I'm glad I do.

NuitBlanche · Answer

There are too much weapons in the world. Violence causes violence. Get out of this devils circle

kylee2437 · Answer

Uhh talk about this is super difficult because as much as we wish there was a way to stop bad people, there really isn’t.

OddBeMe · Answer

Imagine this: Cops in shootouts only hit their targets 30% of the time. What would be the hit rate of a bank employee or random citizen? Or even an old rent a cop?

Massageman · Answer

I agree with you. All "gun control" does is prevent law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves. The crooks will always find a way to get a gun, legal or not.

JesseP1nk · Answer

If you say more guns = more safety. Then how come Europe manage to keep gun violence low with their gun laws.

The United Kingdom has one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in Europe at 0.04 per 100,000 inhabitants.

TrueConfection · Answer

Everyone should be on control of their own gun. 🤓

Static_In_The_Attic · Answer

Talk about an oxymoron & gun control is one of them.

Surely · Answer

Gun control to me. Means hitting whatever you are shooting at!  I agree. Every time they write any gun restrictive legislation. They are one step closer to complete gun control.

Arichip · Answer

People can have guns just not the military guns. They are not needed in public. Very few guns are used for protection as some believe. lol

worldscolide · Answer

Agreed I have enough guns and ammo to arm a small army..

CassandraSpender · Answer

Gun control is important, be sure to use both hands

SmokinAces2000 · Answer

Yeah everyone should have a bunch of guns because there is definitely no way that anyone will get hurt

AnusNdaPainus · Answer

I think guns are cool and an interesting fun hobby to have

Anonymous · Answer

The only people who need guns are the weaklings that are slower than bullets. I recommend finding the discipline that you lack in life and commit to your training.

Hispanic-Cool-Guy · Answer

Violent and crazy people shouldn't have access to guns, otherwise I'm good with guns.

Manuel2 · Answer

There is not any control of gun unless you have one.

justabuddy · Answer

I think fun control is useful to a point. After that I think it does more harm than good. Mostly I think gun control is more emotional than logical.

gothbxtch · Answer

guns ABSOLUTELY need to be banned. no one should have a gun.

gorydetails · Answer

read the 2nd amendment. Shall not be infringed.

Astarlessnightsky · Answer

Only those who doesn't want a gun should get one.

mrkdvsn · Answer

I absolutely agree

Peter_Penetrator · Answer

No one can CONTROL whether I own a GUN or not.

chicken_nugget24 · Answer

Guns should be used in the army abd

BLP11520 · Answer

Gun control is hitting the target accurately

What's your view on gun control?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

What's your view on gun control?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

We're glad to see you liked this post.