Gun Control

Apparently you can't vote for the debate topic so I picked gun control.

That's a nice way to start of a debate.

I'm no expert in the laws regarding the control of guns, but I think gun control isn't the problem, mental health is. For some kid who's been **** on his whole life and wants to be remembered/feared, just killing himself isn't gonna do it, he has to take others down with him. Then they shoot up a school, and their name gets plastered all over the media.
That creates a vicious cycle as other kids see their "success", and go shoot up their own school.
(I pretty much ripped that from somewhere, but I can't remember where, anyone know)

Ultimately, if someone really wants a gun, they can get one, and no laws are gonna stop that, thanks to black markets and under-the-counter sales, but helping the people most likely to do the shooting is more likely to prevent the shooting, and improve someone's life

I'm assuming that's basically the theme KoC was going for anyway

Disallowing guns is a direct violation of the Constitution.

What do you guys think of Switzerlands law issuing every adult a firearm and training them to use it?

^Recipe for disaster.

The problem with the US is that Constitution bullsh!t that Dark Breloom mentioned. But although banning guns wouldn't prevent gun crime entirely, it would certainly reduce it. The fact that nothing is being done about it is the problem.

Gun crime is very rare here in the UK.

Imagine if every (sane) teacher in schools had a gun in a lockbox in their desk. School shootings would have less casualties.

Yeah, until some kid breaks in cause the teacher left their key somewhere stupid (combination keys? Even easier to break into), or the teacher snaps, then you have an even worse problem.

Yes but then the other teachers would intervene. A teacher could snap at any time if he brought his own gun. But in that situation the other teachers wouldn't be able to stop him as easy. I imagine it would be a safe like this http://bulletin.accuratesho...-please/

And who would pay for these?

Honestly if we ever come to a point where we feel so unsafe in our schools that we need a gun in every classroom I don't think the presence of that gun will change much.

The gun laws within the Constitution were designed in order for the public to have a defense in case of a tyrannical government taking form. With all the money invested in military research, a few rifles won't do much at all.

This leads to the fact that the fathers of the Constitution had intentions that it would need to be re-written every so often to better reflect the times. Now, moving onto the main point (hoping this is the main point as the OP doesn't state the limits of the debate like it should), I believe Americans do reserve the right to have firearms. However, I also believe that more regulations and training should be imposed on gun owners.

If you simply take guns away from us, it's not going to stop the criminals making this a problem as they are criminals. They don't follow the rules. So, I believe one of the more valid solutions would be mandatory Psych testing and safety training before being able to buy guns. I also believe annual psych testing should be mandatory for those who are registered to own guns.

Do you have any idea how much red tape you have to go through to get a gun these days? It's extremely bureaucratic and really annoying. I'm not gonna give details because that would reveal my state.

That's the way it should be. Guns should be available, because even if they aren't the people who really want to get their hands on them can. There's just too many guns in this country to even think about 'taking them away'. But making it harder for non-criminals (which usually includes people that tend to shoot up schools - mentally ill, but not otherwise inclined to commit crime) could potentially be effective in reducing the amount of school/mass shootings that are seemingly random. Requiring psych evals before allowing citizens to purchase guns doesn't seem like a bad idea, and requiring a basic firearms safety course would hopefully reduce the number of accidentally injuries that often happen.

To me, I personally don't like the fact that Americans can own a gun because you have no idea if the person will become mentally ill later in life, or that they already are.

Gun related violence is so much lower in places like Australia, New Zealand & England. I understand that Americans believe that it is a right (well, it technically is since it's a constitution) but most murders are used with guns. Removing guns wouldn't stop all murders, but it would certainly reduce a large amount of murders.

Since 88 out of 100 Americans own a gun (real statistics from a site), and America's population is about 300 million (predicted in 2014) 88% of 300 million is 264 million. This means around 264 million Americans own a gun. And the chance that one person out of million is mentally ill is extremely high.

My apologies if any of my statistics are wrong. Here are the 2 sites I visited so if you think my statistics are wrong, take a look at the pages.

http://www.theguardian.com/...us-state

http://www.geoba.se/populat...&type=28

Yes but the vast majority of those people are not criminals - they're hunters, shooting enthusiasts, etc. Taking the guns away from those people isn't going to do anything but make them angry. The people who need the guns taken away, the criminals, aren't going to give them up. That's why they're criminals. If you can think of a way to effectively take guns off the streets and out of the hands of people that use them for harm, then you've got something.

Well that is a good point. If you tried taking guns off everyone, so many would protest and it would get messy.

I hope that gun control laws stay in Australia for a long time. Once you let people buy guns, there's no easy way of getting them back.

you do realize that if every teacher in columbine / sandy hook / random school shooting had a gun, a lot less people would have died? instead of teachers having to rely on police, they could have actually defended themselves and the students.

most school shooters are not actually gun owners; lanza took his mother's guns, columbine's shooters were students.

Of course, if your country has strict gun control, there's going to be less relevant shootings. that doesn't mean that the murder rates are necessarily lower, plus there's probably less successful murder attempts in the US as more people have guns for self-defense.

There was a shooting in some school in Georgia. A student tried to fire on other students. He could have killed quite a few of them but he didn't. He didn't because the principal had a gun with him.
Another point - go to any ghetto I'm willing to bet 9 out of 10 guns are black market and unregistered.
Also most gun owners have multiple guns.

DB said:

Disallowing guns is a direct violation of the Constitution.

The Constitution was written with the idea that it would have to be re-written as time goes on. Things change. The world changes. Guns were thought necessary back then due to exactly the reason Tegan gave: "...designed in order for the public to have a defense in case of a tyrannical government taking form."

KoC said:

Imagine if every (sane) teacher in schools had a gun in a lockbox in their desk. School shootings would have less casualties.

The American school system really needs to focus on funding education more than funding guns. Our educational system is complete sht. School shootings happen so rarely, it'd hardly be worth the money. If anything, the police force needs to respond quicker. Have some cops on patrol at schools during school hours. It's cheaper, and at least a bit more efficient and effective.

KoC said:

Do you have any idea how much red tape you have to go through to get a gun these days?

You only have to go through red tape if you buy guns legally. Outlawing guns would only prevent sane and decent citizens from purchasing guns. There will always be black markets for everything that's outlawed. I could literally drive three hours East, talk to a few people, and buy a .45 for under $1000. No red tape. Just the price of gas and the price of the gun.



In the end, I don't think changing the legality of guns in America is going to actually -change- anything in the country. Adding restrictions in order to get them will only make the process of getting a gun legally much longer and more annoying. People that want a gun for less-than-human means will still be able to get them exactly the same way they are now.
New gun laws will only change the process of 'normal' citizens getting guns through legal ways, and I don't understand how that'll do anything for anyone.

Only an idiot would murder someone with a legal gun. Besides prohibition worked great for alcohol.