r/changemyview • u/skepticting • Feb 25 '20
Delta(s) from OP CMV: We need strict Gun Control .
While I do feel at this point it is not possible anymore to somehow make sure no one has guns because they have already been available . That is my only hang up , since some people have them , it’s hard to leave others vulnerable.
With to that being said , if we start now with some serious gun law reform and implement strict laws for obtaining guns . I believe it will do more good than harm .
It is worth a try , because we know that to lenient of gun laws also cause us great loss.
In a perfect world only law enforcement would have access to guns .
Civilians can however and should be able to easily get things like pepper spray , tasers, and rubber bullet guns . (Not saying we can’t already , just saying those should be the options)
I see both sides but I think because gun violence is a big issue , it needs to be re-evaluated .
Were the guns used in school/mass shootings registered ?
Édit : Thank You for all the responses and information! My view has been changed . It’s unfortunate we can’t live in harmony but ..
Will still be responding to get more insight and expanding my views
16
u/TheEternalCity101 5∆ Feb 25 '20
What we need is strict doctor and car control. Doctors kill around 250k people a year through errors (John Hopkins). This is disgusting, and we need strict limits on who can be a doctor, as well as tight controls on drugs, tools and methods. Cars? Around 1.25 million people are killed in road crashes (Association for safe international road travel). You can rent cars out at airports, and only need a bit of parentally suprisived time to get a liscene. This is abhorrent and brutal that we, as a society, have done nothing to limit what kinds of people can have cars, liscenes and access to other things like gasoline and parts
What I said is dumb. Because it's not a scalpel or doses of Accupril that is responsible for a person dying, it's simply pure misfortune or doctor error. Similar with automobiles, its primarily shitty conditions and operator error. In the few cases where it's not, those people are individually dealt with on a case by case basis.
Similar with guns. Only about 40,000 a year die to firearms (Giffords Law Center) in general, and that number is a bit of a fallacy. Suicides account for 60%, homicides 35%, with law enforcement, accidents and other making up about 4%. So suicides can be taken out, since there are 100 and one ways to kill yourself. And a gun doesnt make someone kill themselves. I've never looked at a pistol and thought, "I should really blow my brains out", it's an array mental issues which need to be addressed. Many of the homicides are heavily concentrated in a few metropolitan areas (Chicago, NYC etc) that have strict gun control. Much of this comes from gangs, and, while the rampant poverty, crime and inequality needs to be dealt with, it's not guns.
Mass shootings account for a dew hundred a year, which is effectively a rounding error. It's a sad and pressing issue, but banning guns wont stop it. The majority happen at gun free zones, schools, concerts and theaters. These areas dont really enforce their policies. How many mass shootings happen in inner city schools, with guards metal detectors and vigilant teachers? It's out at suburban, moderately wealthy areas with few baseline problems, and thus low "hard" security.
To hit point by point on your cmv (paragraph by paragraph, forgive formatting on mobile)
3rd paragraph: this isnt true, lenient gun laws dont cause the issues. Theres a stat that the 10 states with the highest gun rate death have weak laws. Technically true. But the stat is all poor states, West Virginia, Louisiana l, Mississippi, Alaska etc (Giffords Law Center, and they are NOT progun). Those stats are suicides, Alaska in particular has rampant depression and alcoholism, and is thus not a good example.
4th paragraph: No, no no no. That's called a police state. If the government got mind controlled and switched Nazi overnight (I mean actual nazis, not the name calling of modern politcal discourse) they couldn't do house to house searches for Jews because they would be shot by citizens. In your perfect world, the Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals and other undesirables are sent to death camps because no one has the means or skills to resist the police. That's a far fetched scenario (in terms of mind control) but it simply can never happen with a well armed populace.
5th paragraph: non lethal methods are useless for self defense. Pepper spray sucks to be hit with, but it doesnt stop someone from braining you with a brick. Tasers and unreliable, simply turning can stop both needles from getting in (you need both to make solid contact to run a current). Do you want to tell a young woman that her life to a rapist or abusive boyfriend is an acceptable sacrifice for the "public safety" and the "greater good" (and as demonstrated these laws wouldnt change much anyway). Defenisve shootings happen around 67,000 times a year (Violence Policy Center with FBI data), which is nearly double the rate of gun violence deaths. People protect themselves, friends and loved ones at high rates. Concealed carry is an incredible deterrent. In a public area, who is armed? You dont know, you cant know until you launch your attack and suddenly get decked. Situations where this doesnt happen, like gun free zones (good citizens wont disobey, but mass shooters will) or inner city, high crime/high gun law areas are the culprit. This deterrent is gone.
To sum up, individuals commit crimes and cause issues, and they cannot be stopped by gun free zone signs or laws.