While there may be a legitimate claim for some farmers to own a rifle or shotgun this is very different to a city dweller owning a .357 Magnum or an Uzi. It doesn´t matter if you don´t use your gun for killing humans that is still what it was designed to do.
Indeed, and I don't want something designed to tickle a burglar when they break in.
Even discounting deliberate deaths from guns what about the number of accidental deaths which result from having guns in the house?
Much smaller than pools and cars. Also- intent matters, not the weapon being used.
I need a gun to protect myself. Well by owning a gun you are increasing your chances of being killed by a gun. Someone may steal it and use it, someone may accidentally shoot someone with it or someone might just wrestle it from you and shoot you.
The first statement is incorrect. If someone can steal it from me, how is not going to have a gun, which gives me an advantage, going to help?
Gun owners are not immune to crime, gun owners are just as likely to be attacked and burgled as the rest of us. Owning a gun does not make you safe.
True (!). Practicing with and, using it responsibly, and being prepared will help you though.
How many of the people who claim they need a gun for their own safety have actually had to use it anyway? If you claim to need a gun but you´ve never used it then why do you need it?
Never had to use an airbag either, or the emergency generator, or the emergency blanket...
If you live in a really rough place perhaps it is normal to own a gun for your own protection and in the absence of government or police action to improve your area this may be your only way to feel safe. This is tough to argue with, because this shouldn´t be the case, it basically means that your government and police are failing to keep you safe, instead of arming yourself you should fight (peacefully) for them to do their job.
Even the best police force cannot be everywhere, and 15 minutes to get to your home might seem a long time when the bad guy is beating you up.
I realise this is easier said than done but hey I´m idealistic, I´d like a world without guns or wars, this is often discounted as naive, it´s not naive it´s an honest statement, naivety would be believing that I could make it happen. However if enough people worked together with this aim it could be achieved and if you agree then you should swallow your cynicism and try to do something about it, if you don´t think the world would be a better place without guns and wars then you should seek professional help.
'Those who want peace should prepare for war' - i.e. human nature cannot be changed, and removing your ability to defend yourself is foolish.
This argument simply leads to the idea that guns aren´t controlled strictly enough.
Care to explain how Washington DC, with a near total ban on guns, has such a high crime rate, compared to places where guns are more availible?
There are too many in circulation and too many still being produced for the government or police to keep them from falling into the wrong hands. Well maybe we shouldn´t allow our governments to subsidise the weapons manufacturers with our tax money, maybe the manufacturers should be held to account for profiting from death. It is a failure of government if people have to protect themselves in this way and the corrupt link between the weapons manufacturers and government must be broken.
This doesn't make sense. Unless you ant a super invasive police state, police can't prevent crimes. They can solve and hopefull deter them, but that's it.
Canada has proportionally more guns than the US and yet a much lower gun murder rate
This is true but you have to look at the differences in the types of gun, why they have been bought and where the owners live. All this really shows is that guns are even more dangerous in violent cultures than they are elsewhere, the gun is worshipped in the US, a nasty hangover from the war of independence.
The founding fathers, who, by the way, gained our freedom and wrote the bill of rights (you might want to check that out), wanted all people to have guns, in order to ensure liberty. The gun culture is not a nasty hangover, it is one of the greatest legacies of the founding fathers. You may want to do a bit of research on Switzerland, too.
Guns don´t cause the problem people do
This is a good argument; you can´t blame an inanimate object for the actions of mad people. The thing is it would be much harder for these people to kill anyone if they didn´t have a gun. The Columbine massacre wasn´t caused by guns but they certainly made things worse. The real causes of this atrocity should be addressed, it was a failure of society but you have to question a situation where two teenage kids can get their hands on this amount of weaponry. If you are going to have guns then at least treat them responsibly, keep them locked away and educate people about the dangers.
If they couldn't have gotten guns they would've just used some other method of killing.
My gun protects me from corrupt government
This would be a good reason to allow gun ownership, if people actually took action but they don´t. If the government raid someone´s house and they resist with a gun then they generally get shot dead by police marksmen. In a democracy we are supposed to oppose government by voting them out, granted this system has failed because not everyone is represented but I don't think it would make much difference if people opposing the government were armed or not unless they organised themselves into a military force and to be honest I am opposed to violence so that doesn´t strike me as a great idea.
So, if the gov't becomes like 1984 and the only way to resist is with violence, you're just going to not resist? Perhaps, in response to your comment that people don't take action, most people don't think the time is yet appropriate to start shooting government workers? I thought you said you weren't naive.
Any erosion of the first amendment would be a slippery slope
This is another good argument, along the lines that the right to defend yourself is a basic human right. I think it is a basic human right to defend yourself if you are attacked but guns are used in all kinds of situations and too many gun owners don´t limit their gun use to firing ranges and self defence.
How many is too many? Have you facts to back that up? In Florida, those with permits to carry concealed guns have a crime rate that is 1/400th of the general population.
I can see how any erosion of the first ammendment would be a serious cause for concern and could pave the way for other changes which would undermine basic human rights and if that was the cost of banning guns then it wouldn´t be worth doing. I live in the UK so this doesn´t really have the same meaning for me, we have no constitution just an ever changing set of precedents and I think the only way people keep their human rights is to constantly fight for them. Ultimately if the government want to erode those rights they seem to be capable of doing so anyway, just take the Patriot Act for example or the newly introduced "anti-terrorist" laws in the UK which allow detention without charge amongst other things.
So what are you going to do should the government become intolerably oppressive? Give up?
The media ignores incidents in which gun ownership saved someone or prevented a crime
The media definitely concentrates on awful stories about guns, but then they concentrate on awful stories in general, mostly about death, crime and celebrities. I guess there will be occasions when a gun saves the day but I don´t believe that makes up for the misery they cause.
Over 2 million people a year in the US use a gun to defend themselves. Around 15,000 a year are killed by guns - including justifiable self defense. Crime in the US (more guns every year) is falling, while crime in the UK (no guns, theoretically) is increasing. Do you think women should be forced to fistfight with rapists?
In the US, the second amendment was written because the founders recognized the need for a free people to be able to defend themselves. If the populace cannot violently resist the government, then the other obstacle between government and tyranny is based on the whim of the governmnet. Because of this, it is a right to own guns in the USA. Are these guns sometimes misused? Yes, but that does not justify taking away a right of the people. Living in a free country may not be as safe as a police state, but one cannot always have both.
CR
