Imagine this: a family is asleep in their beds at 3:30 in the morning and an armed robber breaks into their home. Because their governments have banned personal firearm ownership they are completely defenseless. You out law guns and then only the out laws have guns; it’s not a pretty situation. There are many myths surrounding gun control and the facts about places that have tried it, in this speech I intend to debunk as many of them as possible.
It is a common misconception that if guns are made illegal that we won’t have as much crime and people will be in less danger of getting shot in a gun related crime. Guns prevent 2.5 million crimes every year, or over 6000 daily. Felons have reported that they are less likely to enter a home of someone who is there because they are afraid of getting shot. They also say that they are more worried about running into an armed homeowner than they are the police. A statistic that is commonly neglected is the one that states that 71% of gun shot victims are criminals themselves (64% of them actually being convicted of something), with an average of 11 prior arrests. In most of gun related crimes (64%) the victim knows their shooter. In Washington DC guns have been banned and the murder rate is 57% per 100000. Across the river in Arlington Virginia they have no regulation on gun ownership and the murder rate is 2% per 100000. In England and Australia it is all but impossible to own guns and they have the highest victimization rates of all countries. Since Brittan has made it hard to get a hold of guns their crime rates, especially violent crime rates, have risen drastically. People then might bring up Japan as an counter example to the one I just gave, but that is flawed because the murder rate in Japan is 1 to 10000 while in the US its 3.2 to 100000 with weapons other than firearms which means that we have three times as much murder as Japan has to begin with. Another myth is that guns are most used to commit violent crimes when in fact 90% of violent crimes have nothing to do with guns.
Gun shows are blamed for a lot of gun purchases by criminals when less than one percent of the guns bought at gun shows end up in criminal hands. However, it is true that 25-50% of the vendors at gun shows are unlicensed dealers, but it must be kept in mind that these people are the ones that aren’t selling guns. This 25-50% is the people at the show selling knives, ammunition and other accessories. Some believe that a waiting period should be required on purchasing guns to lower violent crimes or prevent rash crimes. Most guns used in crime have been bought up to twelve years before hand. It should also be kept in mind that with the five day waiting period instituted by the Bradley law neither murder nor robbery rates have gone down.
People think that “assault weapons” are a huge problem in the US, even more then usual because of the fact that the ban on them was just lifted. Really, there isn’t such a thing as an “assault weapon” in the firearm lexicon; the closest thing is an assault rifle which is a machine gun that takes rifle cartages. In 1994, before the ban on assault weapons, you were eleven times more likely to be beaten to death than you were to be killed by an assault weapon. Nationally, assault weapons were accountable for 1.4% of crimes where firearms were involved and .25% of all violent crimes. Some major urban areas (Mobile, Nashville) and some entire states (New Jersey, Maryland) had a rate of .1%. Most of these assault weapons where no more dangerous than your average hunting rifle. Only 8% of criminals own such weapons as “assault weapons” and even then less than 1% used them. Only one percent of police officers killed were killed using assault weapons and were over twice as likely to be killed with their own guns. It is also a myth that no one needs these weapons: they are easy to operate, reliable in outdoor conditions, are accurate, and have much value in self defense situations. Many hunters and bodyguards use these weapons, which are both perfectly legitimate things for them to be use for. As to the question of wither we have need for these weapons or not doesn’t matter; ours is a Bill of Rights not a Bill of Needs.
Gun owners are a small minority, right? Wrong. Over 32% of Americans claim they own guns and 42% live in a house with them even if they aren’t the owner. Seventy-five percent of America when polled stated that they thought owning a gun was an individual’s right. Time magazine did a survey asking if Americans thought that there should be stricker gun laws and 92% replied with “No”. When asked if they thought that the Brady Bill was effective most replied with “Not at all.”
We have a right to keep and bear arms; it says so in the constitution (second amendment, look it up). Some people would claim that this is unnecessary in our society because of why it was put into the constitution – for militia purposes. The justification clause of the Second Amendment they are being given the right to form a militia necessary for the security of a free state. The justification clause in no way undermines the right’s clause.
The police are supposed to protect us, not guns right? Tell that to the 20000 murder victims, 500000 robbery victims, or the 100000 rape victims that the police could not get to in time. The police even believe that people should have the right to have guns and believe that a majority of criminals are getting their guns illegally anyway. There are 150000 police officers on duty at any time (including the people doing the paper work and answering the phones), there are 271933702 people living in the United States. This means that there is 1 police officer for every 1813 citizens.
The facts clearly speak for themselves; gun control is just a bad idea.
Well i would have to totally agree, the term 'gun control' just doesnt live up to its meaning, better yet its potoential.. you cannot control something you have no control over. What should be inforced are the consequences of killing with guns, here in Florida there is a law passed that you have the right to shoot (AND/OR) kill anyone who trespasses your property and you feel threatened by them, with of course a warning first, and also the person cannot have been facing there backs when shot.
But id like to ask you where you get your statistics, it seems you havent shown any proof of your "numbers".
genuine.
I haven't seen a single person on this site that has proof of their numbers. But never the less, I do have insane amounts of respect for you for asking- people never do.
These figures are from a report I did two years ago. I had a very interesting site at the time that I got it from. Yes I know, website not trust worthy, but statistics can be spun any which way you want them to be. Like I said, my source is two years old, but I'll see if I can dig it up for you.
ihearthypocrites,
Thanks for posting the sources. Genuine beat me to the request. The GunFacts 4-0 is a good reference. I keep one with me almost all the time. It helps to deflate the clueless who are quick to challenge OUR statistics while offering no credible sources for their OWN lies.
Tinkshot
"The purpose of every lie is control."
Here you go: http://www.gunfacts.info/
Most of the statistics can be found in the book, "Point Blank" by Gary Kleck. IIRC, Kleck is a professior at the Florida State University College of Criminology, a card-carrying member of the ACLU who set out to do another study "proving" that guns were evil. What he found surprised him, and, fortunately for us, he had the intellectual honesty to publish his findings.
He was roundly criticized for his methodology in his first study (which showed that guns were used defensively 1-1.5 million times yearly). He repeated the study, addressing the criticisms, and had to admit his earlier estimates were wrong. The numbers were too conservative, and the actual numbers were 2-2.5 million times a year!
See also, "More Guns, Less Crime" by John Lott, professor at University of Chicago, and "That Every Man be Armed" by Stephen Halbrook.
For violence in Europe compared to the US see, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/02/23/ncrim123.xml
And for tons of information on the idiocy of "gun control", see http://keepandbeararms.com
I thought this might be interesting to you. In Kennesaw, Ga, it is mandatory that everyone owns a gun. The crime rates went down a ton. You can check out more on this at:
http://publicrights.org/Kennesaw/CrimeRatePlummets.html
I think it's fascinating.
I've never heard of this! You're right. It is fascinating. Although I don't think people should be required to have guns the fact remains that their crime rates dropped. Thank you for sharing this with me.
The problem with gun control is that it is less than ineffective. "gun control", as in mayor Bloombergs big meeting, is something politicians promote to give the appearance that they are doing something. If your mayor is attending this conference you have elected a do nothing loser.
Next time you read about a crime committed with a gun out in public count the number of laws that have been broken BEFORE the gun is even discharged. None of these laws prevented the occurance of the crime. Remember, if someone has a criminal record they cannot even own a gun, let alone carry one around. In most jurisdictions, even the ones with liberal gun laws, poeple under the age of 21 cannot posess a handgun. How many gang youths are over 21? Etc..
The handgun age limit is one that has never made since to me. They can have a shotgun or a rifle but not a hand gun? The reasoning is that people who hunt use shotguns and rifles, but they all put holes in things practically the same way.
Sometimes the police doesn't help, though. Most police are horrible.
Which is why people need to be able to protect themselves. I don't see how you're disagreeing with me :)
Wait what do you mean by your statistics? 57% for 10000? That doesn't make sense. 57 OUT OF 10000?
Actually what is says is 57% per 10,000. Which since you have a hard time translating me, don't worry it happens sometimes, means 5700.
Everyone,m there is something most don't know about handguns, but which anyone with a little knowledge does know.....
ANYONE can own a handgun, felon or not. All they have to do is go out and order a PERCUSSION handgun, the type used in the civil war, which will be mailed to them at their home straight from the manufacturer (usually Italy's comnpanies). These handguns are highly accurate and reliable as well. I know, I own several of them for competitions. This is because Federal and state law DOES NOT COUNT THESE TYPES OF GUNS AS HANDGUNS!
Now once you spend as little as $120 for this percussion revolver, go to a different website and order the conversion cylinder. It is a drop in component and it also is not regulated and will be mailed directly to your home address. Now the criminal has a .44 caliber or .38 caliber revolver. Simple. Deadly. UNREGULATED.
Another way they do it is this way....ANY handgun made prior to Dec. 31, 1898 is also NOT A HANDGUN. Therefore, they can buy double action Iver-Johnson handguns, Smith and Wesson handguns, and Colt handguns through the mail, sent to their homes. Again, Simple. Deadly. UNREGULATED.
Think criminals don't know this? Check a criminal trial that happened two years ago in Missouri. A criminal was tried in state and federal court for possession of a handgun by a felon.
He was found not guilty for owning a .45 Colt revolver (double action model named the "Thunderer") because he bought it and it had been made in 1880s, for about $250.00 on the internet. Yes, they had to return the gun to him. The ammunition for all these non-handguns can be bought at any store that sells ammunition.
SO MUCH FOR GUN LAWS!
WHICH IS ONE REASON I WILL NEVER BE UNARMED.
Sincerely, One of those dastardly gun nuts.....
I don't really see how you're disagreeing with me... Or how this relates to what I wrote.. but thanks for the information. Erm.. yeah.
home equity line of credit
Thanks for posting this.
My thoughts on gun control.
I am not well educated and I do not know all the big words to be impressive but I think many are confused as to where the real problem is in our country.
Yes violence is becoming a bigger issue each year in our country and it seems to be a solution of many to turn to the government to make rules that take our rights, instead of being accountable for our families, ourselves and yes our neighbors also.
Start thinking about what made the criminal the way he/she is rather than assume it was the ability to get the weapon they used.
The government has taken many rights away from the parent and the teachers in regards to the discipline of children, and so many young people are out of control. Does this make them safer and lead lives that are more productive? I don’t know about where you live but it hasn’t helped in any of the areas I have lived. Most kids run wild and have no sense of respect for others or themselves. Too many have grown up with no respect for life.
When I was a child, I watched my grandfather and felt his pride as he readied for the hunt. Proud because he could feed his family and share with those that had a hard time making ends meet. It was not a sport it was a way of life. Every animal that was brought into the house was thanked for the giving of its life to support our life. No part of that animal was hung on the wall or displayed with disrespect. When the gun wasn’t used to hunt with it was sometimes carried on our walks in the woods to pick berries or hunt mushrooms to protect us from animals that naturally saw us as a threat or food. Yes, we did a lot of target shooting because we wanted to be sure to cause the animal as little suffering as possible. Even as we butchered our own animals, we did so with respect and prayer for the life that provided us with food.
To say that to take away the weapons the violence will stop is ridiculous.
How many times have you witnessed domestic violence? I husband beats their wife, A mother beats a child and we either look away or call the police and never another thought about it. What happened to the community that gathered together and confronted these people and let it be known it was not acceptable and tried to help that family?
What about the children of the people that commit these crimes? Is it enough to create a fund for their education? To put them in the system with a councilor that only sees them once a week? Where are the men in the community to stand up and be a father to these children and others like them that have no mentor to guide them daily? Will they in turn someday hurt someone if we turn our heads now while they are young?
Anytime there is violence in a community everyone should be accountable for we are our brother’s keeper and we will harvest what we reap.
Laws wont help us if we dont help ourselves.