• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does gun control really work? (1 Viewer)

Does this deconstruction of gun control change your viewpoint?

  • yes, I used to be pro gun control but no longer

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I am still pro gun control

    Votes: 7 20.0%
  • I already opposed gun control

    Votes: 21 60.0%
  • your analysis was so terrible that it made me pro gun control

    Votes: 2 5.7%
  • other

    Votes: 5 14.3%

  • Total voters
    35

Masterhawk

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2016
Messages
1,908
Reaction score
489
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The issue of guns divides the nation. The recent Parkland shooting inspired the "March for our Lives". Ignoring the appeal to emotion, does gun control actually work? Many gun control advocates talk about mass shootings but these events don't kill very many people. In 2015, 475 Americans died in a mass shooting (4 or more people are killed or injured) according to the mass shooting tracker. That may seem like a lot but when compared with the total number of 15,399, it's really not.
Mass Shootings - 2015 | Gun Violence Archive

Many gun control advocates look at gun death rates. However, gun deaths include fatal gun accidents and suicides. Furthermore, even if all guns were to go away, there are other means of killing a person such as with a knife. We will be looking at homicide rate instead.

In the links provided below are states ranked by murder rates:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_homicide_rate
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/homicide_mortality/homicide.htm

Here are the gun laws by US state:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_by_state

As one can see, some states are more dangerous than others.However, when looking at the data as a whole, there seems to be very little correlation.

When told of a particularly violent region with lots of gun control such as Chicago, gun control advocates will point out that guns are trafficked from states with more lenient gun laws. Because of this, we will now look at federal gun laws to see if uniform gun legislation reduces the murder rate.

This page has the homicide rate for different countries by past years. In the early ones, it only has a few countries (the US being one of them): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate_by_decade

First, we will look at the national firearms act of 1934. The act placed a $200 excise tax (not adjusted for inflation) on machine guns, short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns, suppressors, and military grade weapons. Although the murder rate went down after the act was passed, the downward trend actually started on the very year on which the act was passed, meaning that the trend was probably caused by what came before 1934, most likely the end of prohibition in 1933. The federal firearms act of 1938 required gun dealers to have a license and prohibited transfer to felons; the downward trend was ongoing before the act and it continued after the act.

In 1968, two major acts of gun legislation were passed: the Omnibus crime bill and the gun control act. The former contained a section prohibition the interstate trade of handguns and prohibited handguns from being sold to anyone under 21. The latter highly regulated interstate trade of all firearms by prohibiting interstate firearms transfers except among licensed manufacturers, dealers, and importers. These two acts puncture holes in gun control, not only because the murder rate didn't go down but it actually went up.

In 1986, the Firearm Owner Protection Act made reforms to the gun control act of 1968. It also contained a provision prohibiting the sale of machine guns to unlicensed civilians (civilians who wanted them had to jump through many hoops) which were made after the date in which the act took effect. The murder rate in the US remained consistent until the 1990s. Furthermore, handguns were always the most dominant form of murder in the US. In the 1980s, knives were actually responsible for more murders than non handguns.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg

The undetectable firearms act of 1988 prohibited firearms with less than 3.7 oz of metal content from being possessed, sold, made, or transferred with few exceptions. The homicide rate actually went up for a few years from 8.4 per 100,000 in 1988 until 1991 with 9.8 before going down.

In 1990, the school gun free zones act prohibited unauthorized individuals from being allowed to carry firearms on school zones. Although the murder rate went up the next year before falling, most murders don't occur on school zones. The shootings in Columbine (1999), Virginia Tech (2007), Sandy Hook (2012), and Parkland (2018) all happened after this act was passed.

In 1993, the Brady handgun violence prevention act prohibited certain people from owning firearms. The homicide rate was going down since 1992 and it continued to go down after the act.

Next is the well known assault weapons ban which was already flawed because many more murders were being committed with handguns than with any other gun combined. After 2004, the murder rate went up for two years before it kept falling.


It seems that gun control does not reduce the murder rate. If I missed anything, feel free to comment below.
 
The issue of guns divides the nation. The recent Parkland shooting inspired the "March for our Lives". Ignoring the appeal to emotion, does gun control actually work? Many gun control advocates talk about mass shootings but these events don't kill very many people. In 2015, 475 Americans died in a mass shooting (4 or more people are killed or injured) according to the mass shooting tracker. That may seem like a lot but when compared with the total number of 15,399, it's really not.
Mass Shootings - 2015 | Gun Violence Archive

Many gun control advocates look at gun death rates. However, gun deaths include fatal gun accidents and suicides. Furthermore, even if all guns were to go away, there are other means of killing a person such as with a knife. We will be looking at homicide rate instead.

In the links provided below are states ranked by murder rates:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_homicide_rate
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/homicide_mortality/homicide.htm

Here are the gun laws by US state:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_by_state

As one can see, some states are more dangerous than others.However, when looking at the data as a whole, there seems to be very little correlation.

When told of a particularly violent region with lots of gun control such as Chicago, gun control advocates will point out that guns are trafficked from states with more lenient gun laws. Because of this, we will now look at federal gun laws to see if uniform gun legislation reduces the murder rate.

This page has the homicide rate for different countries by past years. In the early ones, it only has a few countries (the US being one of them): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate_by_decade

First, we will look at the national firearms act of 1934. The act placed a $200 excise tax (not adjusted for inflation) on machine guns, short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns, suppressors, and military grade weapons. Although the murder rate went down after the act was passed, the downward trend actually started on the very year on which the act was passed, meaning that the trend was probably caused by what came before 1934, most likely the end of prohibition in 1933. The federal firearms act of 1938 required gun dealers to have a license and prohibited transfer to felons; the downward trend was ongoing before the act and it continued after the act.

In 1968, two major acts of gun legislation were passed: the Omnibus crime bill and the gun control act. The former contained a section prohibition the interstate trade of handguns and prohibited handguns from being sold to anyone under 21. The latter highly regulated interstate trade of all firearms by prohibiting interstate firearms transfers except among licensed manufacturers, dealers, and importers. These two acts puncture holes in gun control, not only because the murder rate didn't go down but it actually went up.

In 1986, the Firearm Owner Protection Act made reforms to the gun control act of 1968. It also contained a provision prohibiting the sale of machine guns to unlicensed civilians (civilians who wanted them had to jump through many hoops) which were made after the date in which the act took effect. The murder rate in the US remained consistent until the 1990s. Furthermore, handguns were always the most dominant form of murder in the US. In the 1980s, knives were actually responsible for more murders than non handguns.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg

The undetectable firearms act of 1988 prohibited firearms with less than 3.7 oz of metal content from being possessed, sold, made, or transferred with few exceptions. The homicide rate actually went up for a few years from 8.4 per 100,000 in 1988 until 1991 with 9.8 before going down.

In 1990, the school gun free zones act prohibited unauthorized individuals from being allowed to carry firearms on school zones. Although the murder rate went up the next year before falling, most murders don't occur on school zones. The shootings in Columbine (1999), Virginia Tech (2007), Sandy Hook (2012), and Parkland (2018) all happened after this act was passed.

In 1993, the Brady handgun violence prevention act prohibited certain people from owning firearms. The homicide rate was going down since 1992 and it continued to go down after the act.

Next is the well known assault weapons ban which was already flawed because many more murders were being committed with handguns than with any other gun combined. After 2004, the murder rate went up for two years before it kept falling.


.

We have the most lax gun laws of any developed nation ......are we the safest?
 
We have the most lax gun laws of any developed nation ......are we the safest?

Is that the only difference between us and other developed nations?
 
I am somebody who thinks increased gun control at the federal level could save some lives but I still oppose additional gun control legislation above what we already have. But there are lots of things I think the government could do to save lives that I oppose. All cars could be required to have breathalyzers to start the car or all cars could be required to have “governors” that prevent the cars from going over 80 MPH. Households with children under 16 could be banned from having swimming pools. And so on and so on.

Liberty is inherently dangerous but I still prefer it.
 
Is that the only difference between us and other developed nations?

The developed nations all have gun control and have a wide variety of backgrounds. All are safer than us. Coincidence?
 
We have the most lax gun laws of any developed nation ......are we the safest?

Hmmm...the UK has some tough gun laws, so tough apparently criminals are turning to knives:

The British capital also suffered 22 fatal stabbings and shootings in March, higher than the 21 in New York. There have been 10 fatal stabbings in London in the last 19 days, following on from the 80 fatal stabbings recorded in the city last year.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/london...york-city-first-time-surging-knife-gun-crime/

Now the Mayor want to do some knife control:

After murder rate passes NYC, London Mayor Sadiq Khan calls for sharper knife control.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/04/09/london-mayor-knife-control/500328002/

Point being? Criminals will still use guns (note there were fatal shootings in London too), or knives, or clubs, or bombs, or whatever.

Some people want government to ban the right of people to defend themselves, either from criminals like those above, or their own oppressive government.

One measure always push, Registration; which only serves to make it easier for government to confiscate weapons once they ban them.

Only the MILLIONS of otherwise law-abiding citizens are affected by gun control. :coffeepap:
 
Last edited:
Hmmm...the UK has some tough gun laws, so tough apparently criminals are turning to knives:



https://www.cbsnews.com/news/london...york-city-first-time-surging-knife-gun-crime/



https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/04/09/london-mayor-knife-control/500328002/

Point being? Criminals will still use guns, or knives, or clubs, or bombs, or whatever.

Only the MILLIONS of otherwise law-abiding citizens are affected by gun control. :coffeepap:

Now the Mayor want to do some knife control:

80? My god London would be one of the safest large cities in america then.
 
I was already against gun control. But honestly the people who are pro-gun control either simply don't know enough about it and it's good that you are taking the time to educate them I don't think it's the majority but I think it's a good effort. The majority of gun control advocates are more about control of your rights then of violence.

Nowhere in the developed world has gun control reduced violence it may have reduced the violence attributed to guns but that's just taking away one of the means to do violence it doesn't take away the violence.

Mass shootings simply are a convenient vehicle to spin the gun control narrative. People are horrified by such an act. So much so that they feel they should do something about it. The truth be told there are people accountable in most cases. First and foremost the person doing the shooting is the most accountable secondarily the police if they had warning and did not heed it such as what occurred in the Parkland shooting and in the YouTube HQ shooting.

Darryl of lot of things we can do without adjusting any laws regarding the ownership of guns. It's just that if you propose something that does not involve adjusting laws regarding the ownership of guns people don't want to hear it because they have an agenda.
 
I was already against gun control. But honestly the people who are pro-gun control either simply don't know enough about it and it's good that you are taking the time to educate them I don't think it's the majority but I think it's a good effort. The majority of gun control advocates are more about control of your rights then of violence.

Nowhere in the developed world has gun control reduced violence it may have reduced the violence attributed to guns but that's just taking away one of the means to do violence it doesn't take away the violence.

Mass shootings simply are a convenient vehicle to spin the gun control narrative. People are horrified by such an act. So much so that they feel they should do something about it. The truth be told there are people accountable in most cases. First and foremost the person doing the shooting is the most accountable secondarily the police if they had warning and did not heed it such as what occurred in the Parkland shooting and in the YouTube HQ shooting.

Darryl of lot of things we can do without adjusting any laws regarding the ownership of guns. It's just that if you propose something that does not involve adjusting laws regarding the ownership of guns people don't want to hear it because they have an agenda.

There is no country on earth with lax gun laws like the US and low gun deaths. Our laws are a universal failure. Every country with low gun deaths has effective gun control. They are a universal success. Its as simple as that
 
80? My god London would be one of the safest large cities in america then.

Really?

Met Police records show 37, 443 recorded knife offences and 6,694 recorded gun offences across the UK in the year up to September 2017

In London, the problem was even more pronounced than the rest of the country, with 12,980 knife crimes taking place in the capital - 2,452 more than the equivalent year.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5251268/london-stabbings-2018-knife-crime-statistics-latest/

900 Slashings, Stabbings in NYC This Year (2016)
900 Slashings, Stabbings in NYC This Year

I couldn't find anything closer in date, as news in the USA tends to focus on guns, not knives.

Again, criminals don't care about laws.
 
Last edited:
Is that the only difference between us and other developed nations?

No.
So why does the OP try to debunk the value of gun control by highlighting high crime in high gun control areas? If it's irrelevant going in this direction, it's equally irrelevant in the other.
 
Really?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5251268/london-stabbings-2018-knife-crime-statistics-latest/

900 Slashings, Stabbings in NYC This Year

I couldn't find anything closer in date, as news in the USA tends to focus on guns, not knives.

Again, criminals don't care about laws.

If you really want to make a point (and I don't have time to do what I'm saying you should) don't confine yourself to knife crime, if gun crime is heavily loaded on one side. Violent crime rates in London and NYC, that's the only comparison, if you want to deflect from the point of the thread which is guns.
 
UK has great gun control legislation. London has a higher murder count than New York City.

You are comparing London to the safest large city in the US. Gun control works
 
The developed nations all have gun control and have a wide variety of backgrounds. All are safer than us. Coincidence?

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmm. London has a higher murder rate than New York City.
 
Ummmmmmmmmmmmmm. London has a higher murder rate than New York City.

Do you know that was for only two months? Do you know NYC is the MODEL of a safe city due to gun control?
 
There is no country on earth with lax gun laws like the US and low gun deaths. Our laws are a universal failure. Every country with low gun deaths has effective gun control. They are a universal success. Its as simple as that

Again, check out London. Higher murder rate than New York City.
 
If you really want to make a point (and I don't have time to do what I'm saying you should) don't confine yourself to knife crime, if gun crime is heavily loaded on one side. Violent crime rates in London and NYC, that's the only comparison, if you want to deflect from the point of the thread which is guns.

The point of the thread is that gun control legislation does not cut down on violence and murders. They just don't do it with guns. What's the difference if you are murdered by a gun or a knife? When you're dead, you're dead.
 
The point of the thread is that gun control legislation does not cut down on violence and murders. They just don't do it with guns. What's the difference if you are murdered by a gun or a knife? When you're dead, you're dead.

Developed countries with effective gun control are much safer than the US
 
Do you know that was for only two months? Do you know NYC is the MODEL of a safe city due to gun control?

Oh please. I used to live in New York State and went to the city a few times. I still wouldn't feel safe there at all.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom