Philosophical Vegan Forum

So, I live in the U.S.A. I know that other countries have outlawed or heavily regulated firearms. I just read in the paper that a girl, I think 11 years old, was given an UZI to fire at a gun range and the recoil made her lose control and shoot the instructor. I own a few rifles and go to the shooting range every once in a while but I grew up here in the U.S. so I don't know what is normal elsewhere. I thought I would take the opportunity to ask this diverse community what they think of guns, gun rights, policy, etc... why is the US crime rate so high? is it our culture? economics? what? I realize this is a complicated question but I want outside reflection. I have always thought that people have the right to defend themselves, and guns are the great equalizer of self defense, but what is driving our shootings? gun ownership or some part of culture? also is the crime rate lower or just different in other countries, in other words...Are stabbings and beatings more common in countries with stricter gun control? are illegal guns just as prevalent from black market sales? etc...

isn't it obvious? The Government is crap here

To be honest. I just couldn't help myself. But to be serious, Even if the government tried to control guns, it would only increase crime rates considering that guns are now illegal. Just like weed. It's illegal, so everyone wants to do it and feel goddamn rebellious -.-

I'm not sure it would be the same as weed. Maybe in the USA, where they already have legal gun ownership established. There are many things that are illegal that people don't necessarily want to obtain. Here in the Netherlands ordinary people don't have guns, but it also doesn't seem that anybody has the desire to have one. It just doesn't come up. That's why from my perspective gun control seems only dangerous, what purpose does it really serve?

There are two systems i think are good to implement into places like america.
This one is not particularly popular in NT Australia, it was implemented in order to reduce alcohol related death/violence/crime, known as the banned drinker registry. it made it illegal to sell alcohol to people who 1) don't have photo identification. 2) are on the banned drinker registry, the registry could possibly make it legal for police to remove weaponry from people on the list. As for the data i do not know if the registry reduced alcohol fuelled violence or not. this would make it impossible, or at least harder, for people with a history of crime/violence to get a gun.

the other system i think is acceptable is to follow the rest of the world and require a licence for ownership/use of a firearm. why did this not happen years ago?

as for your argument regarding self defence. 1) introducing a license to bare arms will still allow for the ownership/use of fire arms. 2) it will however remove weaponry from people who have a history of violence/crimes.

bobo0100 wrote:There are two systems i think are good to implement into places like america.
This one is not particularly popular in NT Australia, it was implemented in order to reduce alcohol related death/violence/crime, known as the banned drinker registry. it made it illegal to sell alcohol to people who 1) don't have photo identification. 2) are on the banned drinker registry, the registry could possibly make it legal for police to remove weaponry from people on the list. As for the data i do not know if the registry reduced alcohol fuelled violence or not. this would make it impossible, or at least harder, for people with a history of crime/violence to get a gun.

the other system i think is acceptable is to follow the rest of the world and require a licence for ownership/use of a firearm. why did this not happen years ago?

as for your argument regarding self defence. 1) introducing a license to bare arms will still allow for the ownership/use of fire arms. 2) it will however remove weaponry from people who have a history of violence/crimes.

There are things like that in place. They just unfortunately vary widely from too restrictive to almost no restriction at all from state to state. Ideally you would want common sense laws that keep weapons out of the hands of dangerous or irresponsible individuals. But there are so many nuances that make it much more complicated. What should come first somebodies mental medical privacy or the right of somebody to own a firearm? It becomes difficult to balance those without dumping on one of those issues. At this point in America I think that there is way too much corporate leverage over the government and almost all of our law enforcement agencies are para militarized to a significant degree. If guns were banned I feel many of our other rights would be subsequently shit on more then they already are.

And to the OP do we have more crime in America or do we just criminalize more things and people?

You can go to a gun show in America and buy/sell/swap a gun with other citizens that are vending at show, most of the time they will not ask you for your gun license.

Yea maybe they shouldn't give a SubMachine gun to a child next time..