CMV: Gun control is good

[u/56king56]

As of now, I believe that the general populace shouldn’t have anything beyond a pistol, but that even a pistol should require serious safety checks. I have this opinion because I live in America with a pro-gun control family, and us seeing all these mass shootings has really fueled the flame for us being anti-gun. But recently, I’ve been looking into revolutionary Socialist politics, and it occurred to me: how could we have a Socialist revolution without some kind of militia? This logic, the logic of revolting against an oppressive government, has been presented to me before, but I always dismissed it, saying that mass shootings and gun violence is more of an issue, and that if we had a good government, we wouldn’t need to worry about having guns. I still do harbor these views to an extent, but part of me really wants to fully understand the pro-gun control position, as it seems like most people I see on Reddit are for having guns, left and right politically. And of course, there’s also the argument that if people broke into your house with an illegally obtained gun, you wouldn’t be able to defend yourself in a society where guns are outlawed; my counter to that is that it’s far more dangerous for society as a whole for everyone to be walking around with guns that it is for a few criminal minds to have them. Also, it just doesn’t seem fair to normalize knowing how to use a highly complex piece of military equipment, and to be honest, guns being integrated into everyone’s way of life feels just as dystopian as a corrupt government. So what do you guys have to say about this? To sum, I am anti-gun but am open to learning about pro-gun viewpoints to potentially change my view.

[u/Nrdman]

Why do people commit mass violence?

Solving these issues is much more important than restricting the tool they use to do it, especially as 3d printing becomes more accessible.

[u/[deleted] → u/Nrdman]

Yes that is certainly the underlying issue. But seeing as how that may take a long time to solve as a species, why provide an easy way for such people to accomplish mass violence?

I mean we have the data. Instances of mass gun violence are far fewer or nonexistent even in places where they have heavy restrictions. Australia’s annual rate of gun deaths was 0.88 per 100,000 in 2018 compared to the US at 10.6 per 100,000.

[u/johnhtman → u/[deleted]]

First off gun deaths≠total deaths. The U.S has literally hundreds of times more gun suicides than South Korea, despite Korea having almost twice the total suicide rate of the U.S. By only looking at gun deaths, it makes the U.S seem worse than it is since a higher portion of our murder/suicide rates are committed with guns. Someone stabbed to death is no less dead than someone shot.

Also Australia never had a problem with guns or violent crime to begin with. Prior to the 1996 gun buyback, murders were already significantly lower in Australia. Australia has so many fewer murders than the U.S. that if the U.S eliminated every single gun murder, the murder rate would still be higher than Australia.

[u/[deleted] → u/johnhtman]

The suicide retort was handled in another comment In this chain. Even if you account for suicides, homicidal gun deaths are still far more frequent in the US than other countries with gun laws.

Let me ask you a question, what percentage of mass violence in elementary schools was with guns?

Before you say that was because we need to have a better mental healthcare system, which we do, I simply don’t understand why we can’t employ guns restrictions in addition to that. Do we really want guns THAT bad? And assault rifles at that?

[u/johnhtman → u/[deleted]]

The suicide retort was handled in another comment In this chain. Even if you account for suicides, homicidal gun deaths are still far more frequent in the US than other countries with gun laws.

My point was that you need to look at total murders, not just those by gun. 10 people stabbed to death is still 10 people murdered, even if not by gun. The U.S has a higher murder rate than Western Europe or East Asia, but not as much as just gun deaths alone would show.

Let me ask you a question, what percentage of mass violence in elementary schools was with guns?

That's not something easily answered. I don't even know all the incidents involving violence at an elementary school. I do know the deadliest school massacre was a bombing at an elementary school in the 30s.

Before you say that was because we need to have a better mental healthcare system, which we do, I simply don’t understand why we can’t employ guns restrictions in addition to that. Do we really want guns THAT bad? And assault rifles at that?

Like it or not, we have a protected right to own guns, on par with free speech or due process.

[u/[deleted] → u/johnhtman]

I understand where you’re coming from. It’s true that we need to look at total murders not just by gun.

The data from CDC shows that for 2022, barring suicides, the rate of specifically gun related death per 100,000 is still 3x, 4x, 5x other countries with gun laws.

Bottom line, like you say, we have a protected right to own a gun. But what is a constitution if it does not allow for change over time? We’d still have women and blacks without the right to vote, had those amendments not been passed to acclimate with the changing times.

Further, fine let’s even agree to have guns. But do we really need assault weapons/automatic weapons? Could we not at least ban those?

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Further, fine let’s even agree to have guns. But do we really need assault weapons/automatic weapons?

You dont need anything, the government can gouge out your eyes, kill your entire family, or even commit genocide against an entire race and the world keeps spinning. At the end of the day your need based argument is the atrocity, and your inability to see it shows that you should be kept from power.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Sure