• 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!

If all firearms disappeared tomorrow would crime go down permanently? Or would the criminals eventually substitute other weapons to commit crimes?

Would the total elimination of firearms reduce crime?


  • Total voters
    67

ALiberalModerate

Pragmatist
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
28,016
Reaction score
18,579
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Many people thinks guns are the main factor in crimes. What if they did not exist? Would criminals just substitute other weapons and commit just as many robberies, murders, rapes, etc, using knives, mace, machetes, cars, their hands and other weapons? Would there be just as many crimes and murders per year using other weapons? Let's hear your input!
How many deer do you think hunters would take every year if they had to rely on spears and knives rather than firearms? There would still be some taken, but not nearly as many because a firearm is a much more efficient tool to kill with.

The biggest mass stabbing ever occurred China inside of an underground subway terminal. I have spent a lot of time in China over the years, and I will tell you that you cannot imagine a better place to conduct a mass stabbing than a subway terminal at rush hour in China. Thousands of people, crowded in a small place with limited exits. Yet despite this, the assailants were only able to kill less than 4 people each. Compare that to the number of people the could have killed with semi automatic handguns or AR's, likely hundreds at least.

My point is, and I am saying this as someone that likely owns more guns than most people on here do (it's what happens when you grown in the South with a family of dedicated hunters and you outlive most of them), we are a society awash in guns, and we have a constitutional right to own them and that won't change, but we should not pretend that there is not a societal cost to that, because there is. If you have a society awash in guns, you will have more murders than you otherwise would because it's just easier to kill people. It is why we have by far the highest homicide rate of any other wealthy nation.
 

mrdeltoid

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2018
Messages
4,510
Reaction score
1,695
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Yeh, can see kids wheeling in barrels of fertilizer and kerosene now😃. Do you actually believe this shtuff or do you have 🦊 on in the background?
We are playing "If all firearms disappeared tomorrow would crime go down permanently". It's a hypothetical. You asked, "Don't you think the cops would have saved some of the school kids if crazy dude had a knife instead." I mused a counter hypothetical. In case you missed it, or it was before your time, McVeigh drove the truck load of explosives to the Oklahoma Gov't building. "Crazy dude" drove to the school; hence, "crazy dude" could also drive a box truck to the school. Are you actually ignorant of U.S. history, or do you have CNN on in the background?
This is why I don't like responding to hypotheticals. In the "what if world", a nut driving a truck load of explosives to a school is as plausible as "all guns suddenly disappearing". As a matter of fact, the nut driving a truck load of explosives to a building actually happened. I understand your confusion though. Perhaps it was before your time.
 

neil

Ultra-Maga like-slut
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
1,385
Reaction score
935
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Firearms may be the best invention of humankind in that they've enabled society to achieve the level of liberty, peace, and harmony (reduction in crime, oppression, terror, etc.).

Firearms can be lethal and at a distance, which makes them very powerful tools of defense; all that firearms users have to do to make it an effective weapon is learn one basic skill that isn't difficult to learn, which is aiming it at their targets.

Without firearms, criminals, oppressors, etc. are more dangerous with other types of deadly & destructive weapons, such as swords, daggers, clubs, mace, battle axes, battle hammers, etc. Those weapons require the users to have the strength to make them effective, to be highly skilled in using them, to have the quick speed & reflexes against opponents who can match their quick speed & reflexes, or a combination of these qualities.

This is why criminals and the Left hate firearms; it makes it so much more difficult for them to get away with their crimes and to oppress people.
 

ALiberalModerate

Pragmatist
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
28,016
Reaction score
18,579
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Firearms may be the best invention of humankind in that they've enabled society to achieve the level of liberty, peace, and harmony (reduction in crime, oppression, terror, etc.).

Firearms can be lethal and at a distance, which makes them very powerful tools of defense; all that firearms users have to do to make it an effective weapon is learn one basic skill that isn't difficult to learn, which is aiming it at their targets.

Without firearms, criminals, oppressors, etc. are more dangerous with other types of deadly & destructive weapons, such as swords, daggers, clubs, mace, battle axes, battle hammers, etc. Those weapons require the users to have the strength to make them effective, to be highly skilled in using them, to have the quick speed & reflexes against opponents who can match their quick speed & reflexes, or a combination of these qualities.

This is why criminals and the Left hate firearms; it makes it so much more difficult for them to get away with their crimes and to oppress people.
Why are we the most dangerous wealthy nation on earth then? I mean, if a society awash in guns is safer, then why are we not safer?
 

neil

Ultra-Maga like-slut
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
1,385
Reaction score
935
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Why are we the most dangerous wealthy nation on earth then?
Loaded (and ambiguous) question - with many premises I might add. Are we the most wealthy nation or the most dangerous nation, or are you saying we're both the wealthiest and most dangerous of all nations? Dangerous to whom? Firearms/guns are designed to be dangerous, and that danger against our adversaries protects us; those tools of danger underwrite our liberty, which in turn makes us prosperous, which in turn makes us a very wealthy nation. That's a good thing, not a bad thing.

I mean, if a society awash in guns is safer, then why are we not safer?
Safer for whom? Criminals? Oppressors? I want it to be as unsafe for criminals and oppressors as possible; that's the most important purpose for keeping and bearing arms.
 

ALiberalModerate

Pragmatist
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
28,016
Reaction score
18,579
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Loaded (and ambiguous) question - with many premises I might add. Are we the most wealthy nation or the most dangerous nation, or are you saying we're both the wealthiest and most dangerous of all nations? Dangerous to whom? Firearms/guns are designed to be dangerous, and that danger against our adversaries protects us; those tools of danger underwrite our liberty, which in turn makes us prosperous, which in turn makes us a very wealthy nation. That's a good thing, not a bad thing.


Safer for whom? Criminals? Oppressors? I want it to be as unsafe for criminals and oppressors as possible; that's the most important purpose for keeping and bearing arms.
You didn’t answer the question.
 

neil

Ultra-Maga like-slut
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
1,385
Reaction score
935
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
You didn’t answer the question.
You seem to have a severe lack of basic communication, comprehension, and reasoning skills. I suggest you do something to fix that problem; I'm not going to do that for you.

You didn't ask a single question, and I responded to your questions; when you satisfactorily respond to my questions, then I'll be able to answer your questions.

That's what you need to do first in order to expect me to answer your questions. :rolleyes:
 

RF667799

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 23, 2015
Messages
13,560
Reaction score
11,402
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Why are we the most dangerous wealthy nation on earth then? I mean, if a society awash in guns is safer, then why are we not safer?

It's a big country, it doesn't consist of a homogeneous society, and the wealthier areas aren't particularly dangerous.
 

ALiberalModerate

Pragmatist
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
28,016
Reaction score
18,579
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
You seem to have a severe lack of basic communication, comprehension, and reasoning skills. I suggest you do something to fix that problem; I'm not going to do that for you.

You didn't ask a single question, and I responded to your questions; when you satisfactorily respond to my questions, then I'll be able to answer your questions.

That's what you need to do first in order to expect me to answer your questions. :rolleyes:
Let me make this as plain as I can. When you compare the United States to our wealthy peer nations, nations like Canada, Northern European nations, Western European nations, South Korea, Japan, and Australia, you will find that our homicide rate is several times what the homicide rate is in those other nations.

We have 7.5 times the homicide rate of other high income countries: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30817955/

It is your contention that guns make us a safer society. We have the highest firearm ownership rate on earth, its not even close. We have more guns in private hands in this country than we have citizens. So obviously your contention is wrong. That is the point.
 

Mike_Iger

Banned
Joined
Jun 29, 2022
Messages
128
Reaction score
106
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Guns are a death multiplier. The body count will go down because you can stab just so many before your hand gets tired. Guns on the other hand with large mags just keep going, so what if you get callouses on your trigger finger.
 

neil

Ultra-Maga like-slut
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
1,385
Reaction score
935
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Let me make this as plain as I can. When you compare the United States to our wealthy peer nations, nations like Canada, Northern European nations, Western European nations, South Korea, Japan, and Australia, you will find that our homicide rate is several times what the homicide rate is in those other nations.

We have 7.5 times the homicide rate of other high income countries: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30817955/

It is your contention that guns make us a safer society. We have the highest firearm ownership rate on earth, its not even close. We have more guns in private hands in this country than we have citizens. So obviously your contention is wrong. That is the point.
Oh, you may have me confused with someone else, since I didn't contend anything about guns making us a safer society (not that I agree or disagree with the other individual you apparently have me confused with, though).
 

ALiberalModerate

Pragmatist
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
28,016
Reaction score
18,579
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate

neil

Ultra-Maga like-slut
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
1,385
Reaction score
935
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian

ALiberalModerate

Pragmatist
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
28,016
Reaction score
18,579
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Loaded question - there's no word salad written in that post. That post is the point, and about the point, to my answer to the thread's poll question.
Then summarize your point. If high rates of firearm ownership doesn't make us a less dangerous society, then what is your point?
 

multivita-man

Suspended
Joined
Oct 30, 2021
Messages
5,166
Reaction score
3,733
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Would it reduce crime as a whole? Maybe not but it would almost certainly reduce homicide.
 

TearItAllDown

Proud Deplorable!
Joined
Oct 11, 2021
Messages
1,312
Reaction score
750
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Would it reduce crime as a whole? Maybe not but it would almost certainly reduce homicide.
That is only if all firearms disappeared. What's the chance of that happening? Just because the government makes a law doesn't mean the people will obey it. It's against the law to speed, park illegally, do illegal drugs, jaywalk, and a whole slew of other things that are routinely ignored. I want to see career criminals line up to turn in their guns. No matter what the left will do, it will not cause almost half a billion guns to magically disappear or never get used again. Anyway, to me this whole anti-gun stuff is aimed at weakening the NRA's campaign financing capability, but as with so many other things the left does, it will backfire if there is ever a ban on firearms and cause a ton of money to pour into the NRA and that money will be used to get rid of anti-gun politicians whenever possible. Maybe the left should stick to the transgender rights fight instead.
 

neil

Ultra-Maga like-slut
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
1,385
Reaction score
935
Location
Northern Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Then summarize your point.
My post is already a summary-sized write-up, but if you want me to summarize the "summary" (to something rather abstract), then it's this: I'm a libertarian.

If high rates of firearm ownership doesn't make us a less dangerous society, then what is your point?
Strawman - I never made any assertions regarding high rates of firearm ownership. A society that's free to keep and bear arms doesn't need to high rates of firearm ownership in order to preserve liberty & prosperity. The awareness & understanding by wannabe criminals & oppressors that such a free society is capable of arming itself to the teeth, or that they don't know whether or not their potential victims are armed to the teeth, can be enough to keep them in check.

I'd be most confident that I'm in the safest & most secure as possible place, by living in a community where every member in it is armed & dangerous, even if I myself am not armed at all (but no one knew it); the reason for this is because that's where criminals and oppressors are least likely to bother anyone in such a community - including me.
 

multivita-man

Suspended
Joined
Oct 30, 2021
Messages
5,166
Reaction score
3,733
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
That is only if all firearms disappeared. What's the chance of that happening? Just because the government makes a law doesn't mean the people will obey it. It's against the law to speed, park illegally, do illegal drugs, jaywalk, and a whole slew of other things that are routinely ignored. I want to see career criminals line up to turn in their guns. No matter what the left will do, it will not cause almost half a billion guns to magically disappear or never get used again. Anyway, to me this whole anti-gun stuff is aimed at weakening the NRA's campaign financing capability, but as with so many other things the left does, it will backfire if there is ever a ban on firearms and cause a ton of money to pour into the NRA and that money will be used to get rid of anti-gun politicians whenever possible. Maybe the left should stick to the transgender rights fight instead.

The thread literally asked "if all firearms disappeared tomorrow".
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
90,951
Reaction score
43,955
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It's pretty stupid to believe that a tool doesn't facilitate a task, because that's basically the definition of a tool.
 

Ishm

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2021
Messages
1,219
Reaction score
883
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Thank you for that and it makes some sense. However remember my poll question posed whether or not determined criminals would find another weapon to commit their crimes if their guns were taken away. How would gang members protect their turf of get revenge on other gangs without guns?
Baseball bats, axe handles, knives and other stuff that don't do what guns do. That's the experience outside the US at least. The trouble in taking the guns away is that generations of easy access to lethal weapons has probably created a psyche that might be harder to remove than the guns. US definitely has a much more blase attitude to homicides than most similar countries.
 

jpevans

Masshole
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 7, 2012
Messages
5,858
Reaction score
3,354
Location
Western Mass.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
That is only if all firearms disappeared. What's the chance of that happening? Just because the government makes a law doesn't mean the people will obey it. It's against the law to speed, park illegally, do illegal drugs, jaywalk, and a whole slew of other things that are routinely ignored. I want to see career criminals line up to turn in their guns. No matter what the left will do, it will not cause almost half a billion guns to magically disappear or never get used again. Anyway, to me this whole anti-gun stuff is aimed at weakening the NRA's campaign financing capability, but as with so many other things the left does, it will backfire if there is ever a ban on firearms and cause a ton of money to pour into the NRA and that money will be used to get rid of anti-gun politicians whenever possible. Maybe the left should stick to the transgender rights fight instead.
The whole point of this exercise is that guns magically disappear & I guess the memory of them. How long before someone invents them?
 

uptower

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
13,977
Reaction score
9,960
Location
Behind you - run!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Of course crime will always exist. Even countries with low gun ownership have other violent crimes. Depending on their socio-economic circumstances, some shockingly so.

But gun crime will go down. The lethality and finality of being shot will be drastically reduced. Mass murder will be much harder and less frequent. Robberies will less likely result in death. Gun accidents at home or domestic violence-related gun deaths will drop too because guns make easier to kill someone on the spur of the moment. Police shooting of suspects will go down too because they'll be less paranoid he "might have a gun."

The fact is guns simply make it too damn easy to kill and to kill in multiples. Less of them means less of that and the stats bear this out in industrialized, wealthy nations otherwise comparable to America.
 
Top Bottom