Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dksuddeth
thats odd, because I hear of gun crimes committed against your disarmed citizens on a daily basis. On top of that, what is the rest of your violent crime stats? how many done with knives and clubs? how many rapes, assaults, robberies?
I wouldn't have the kids armed, obviously, but more than one massacre has been prevented or stopped from having an adult around (not a cop) that had a gun.
no, my argument is that the bad guys are victimizing unarmed individuals, therefore those unarmed individuals should arm themselves to protect themselves. THAT will do.
a picture perfect example of how banning guns did NOT prevent crime, it only forced those intent on committing crime to find a different means.
|
There have been roughly 2 1/2 million reported incidents of violent crime in 2000, the highest majority of which was at home (27%).
On average, 43% of violent crimes were commited by a stranger.
Those may sound like large numbers, but i would like to see what the figures are in the states.
I'm not saying there isn't gun crime, of course there is. However, it is rare (comparative) and certainly isn't as prevelant as it is in the states.
How many knife crimes are committed in the states?
I applaud your idea that kids shouldn't have weapons, thats what i'm trying to say, and thats what this amnesty was trying to prevent, kids having weapons. We can't have everyone going around armed, because it only takes one idiot before we have a riot. Not everyone is as well informed about the dangers of weapons as others.
You say more than one massacre has been prevented by guns, but how many more have been caused? Its not a very good arguing point. Did those kids who went nuts at schools do it with guns they purchased on the black market, or happened to get from the store/family/home e.t.c?
Banning guns has prevented crime, it doesn't prevent all crime, but it does prevent alot that would happen if people had free access to guns. You can't ban knives, but you can at least try to keep them under control from a legal stand point.
The point that you seem to be making is that people should be armed because the criminals are armed. Shouldn't the whole point be stopping the criminals have weapons in the first place?
Edit: Just a thought, but how many people (criminals and law abiding) know how to use a knife, beyond stab and hope for the best, anyway?