Originally Posted by richie3888
I'm writing a paper about how I believe stricter gun laws will not reduce the number of homicides in United States.
It's an argumentative paper.
Ok. So, arguments FOR gun control:
1. If people don't have guns, there can be no gun crime!
2. If guns are less easily available, there will be less gun crime!
3. If people don't have guns that easily kill lots of people, they can't easily kill lots of people!
4. Criminals can get guns legally! This needs to stop!
Ok, so to break those down completely, because these things are what liberals actually believe:
1. A gun free-utopia cannot exist. If people don't have guns, there can be no gun crime - you're completely right - but that can never exist in the United States, or, for that matter, anywhere in the world. There's always a way to get a gun, legally or illegally.
2. If guns are less easily available, then the ones that criminals always have, and all of the ones available on the black market, are still just as easily available to criminals. The fact is, criminals already have the guns they need, and if they don't, they can steal them from someone's house. Burglars are the main reason that deadly guns end up on the black market.
3. "Assault weapons" are rarely used in crime. More importantly, the guns doing the most damage are the small handguns that are all over any big city street. You can't conceal an AK-47, nor can you easily find a machine gun for sale. More importantly, even if you took all of the "assault weapons" off of the streets, there's still criminals out there with them. If someone really wants to murder lots of people, they'll find a way. Heck, even when guns are effectively removed from the streets, people still find a way. In China, people go on mass knife/hatchet murder sprees. Gun control, the likes of which to work in America, would have had to have been controlled for about 100 years already. Anyway,
4. Criminals can get guns legally? Are you kidding me? Many crimes have temporary bans on gun ownership - like 5-10 years - and any felony, or any domestic violence incident, or any restraining order against you immediately takes your gun rights away. Until you've proven that there's a reason why your rights from the bill of rights need to be taken away for the good of society, and until that's been proven in court, then you have them - that's all there is to it.
Here's the thing. Any criminal who wants a gun, can get one. If we ban guns? Well, I made a gun in my garage, using under $400 worth of tooling, under $500 worth of parts, with NO experience. I used a block of plastic - Delrin - and AR parts that I bought online. It was legal for me to do so, which is why I did it, but even if it wasn't legal for me to do so, I still could have done it. It wasn't even particularly hard to build a single shot pistol that shoots rifle rounds.
If I can build a gun in my garage easily - and I have - then criminals can too. This means that criminals will ALWAYS BE ARMED.
If criminals will always be armed, why would you take away my rights, provided to me in the bill of rights, to make sure that I can defend myself against criminals? If I'm unarmed, and a criminal with a gun picks a fight with me, they will win. There's no maybe. I will walk away losing what they want me to lose... Or I won't walk away at all.
That's not good enough.
I'll keep my rights. I've proven I can build a gun in my garage. If you ban guns, I'll still have them, just like anyone who would want to hurt me.