The Acid Test - or What Happens If Guns Become Scarce

Probably not. We have endemic violence because we are a violent, aggressive people. What it might help is that, in a true "self defense" situation, weapons escalation tends to favor the attacker.

This means that, if we're both unarmed, I will have a better chance than if we both have machine-guns because I have no idea when or from where the attack will come. (This assumes that *I* am the defender; if I'm the attacker, I like guns... and I want *you* to have guns because guns are valuable.)

Jones

Cites?

you are a true blithering idiot. Is it noted on your bus pass?

I would like to see that as well, since the attacker, as a criminal, is already armed with whatever they want. A weapons escalation can only close or eliminate the gap between the capabilities of the criminal and their intended victim, thus evening the odds.

After all, how are you going to keep a criminal from having, carrying and using whatever weapon they chose in crime?

Pass a law?

If so, gun crime would already be non-existent.

Myth!

If guns reduced crime, we would have the world's lowest violent crime rate instead of the highest.

Gun laws can eliminate guns; that is well known. Neither you nor your attacker can buy an AR-15 in Oz... and it works. OK, it works in the sense that we can definitely pick up the guns.

Now, Americans are intrinsically violent and aggressive; picking up the guns won't change that. We're not violent and aggressive because we have guns; we have guns because we're violent and aggressive.

But, the data are pretty much in: high rates of gun proliferation correlate with elevated crime rates... it's not a theory anymore; it's pretty well proven fact. (Despite what Mary Rosh says.) A violent, aggressive person without a gun is less dangerous than a violent, aggressive person with an M-16. That you can't do anything about it except arm yourself is a myth sold by your friendly gun lobby... with big bucls for legislators.

Jones

Actually...we are not the highest and in fact..are something like

Ad if gun control stopped violent crime, then Mexico would be one of the least criminally violent nations on the planet.

There is no gun control in Mexico.

Sure there is. It's all but impossible for the average citizen to get/have a gun, and the ONLY gun store in the entire country is in Mexico City and run by the Mexican military.

So, yes, they have extremely strict gun control..... Not working so well is it?

Mexico is awash in guns. There is no gun control.

You're wrong, Scout's right, Rudy. It's nearly impossible for an average Mexican citizen to legally buy a gun.

Totally irrelevant if the actual ability to enforce the laws occurs as it does in Mexico

Totally relevant if the actual ability of an average Mexican citizen to bribe a LEO to look the other way is nonexistant.

If they could enforce the laws, then they wouldn't need gun control. Rather they could simply enforce the existing laws on violent crimes and solve the whole issue right then.

So clearly we don't need gun control, what we need is enforcement of the laws concerning violent crime.

part of the problem being the proliferation of guns. Look at Europe and Aus where there is gun control and eforcement of the rule of law

de chucka wrote in news:b4udnZnwM4wdLvPEnZ2dnUU7- snipped-for-privacy@westnet.com.au:

snipped-for-privacy@fubahor.com

Why? I don't live in either place and I haven't been murdered.

That assumes that guns CAUSE people to commit violent crimes.

So you really can't tell me that the rates are because of gun control, since by your own admission there is at least one other factor involved.

Hmmm.. Maybe the enforcement of the rule of law is what makes the difference.

After all, I think it's clear that the US has problems enforcing the rule of law, particularly in places like the Southside of Chicago were the gang bangers are in charge.

And let's not forget that he just eliminated their gun control laws as the ONLY reason. Maybe it has far more to do with enforcing the laws that exist. Something I think we can admit the US has problems doing. So maybe what we need isn't more law, but better enforcement?

Gee, haven't we been saying that for decades?

Guns don't cause people to develop an impulse to commit violent crime, but once people form such a thought, easy access to guns lowers the practical barriers to committing the crimes, and so people become more likely to commit them.

So gun control won't eliminate the impulse to commit violent crimes either.

Sorry, once people have decided commit such crimes, then practical barriers have already been eliminated. After that, it?s only a question of when, where and how.

If they are looking to get a gun or other weapon for violent crime, then the decision to commit such crime has already occurred. They are simply now engaged in deciding how they will carry it out. Since they have already decided to break the law by engaging in violent crime, they will have no compunctions about breaking the law to get/make whatever means they decide to have.

Gun control will make it harder for people to act on the impulse, so many won't.