ted45 Loc: Delaware

Well said.

This issue is about giving up more of our right to live life the way we want to. The people in the U.K. gave up a huge chunk of their individual liberty and some, like the OP seem to think we should too.

RacerDan Loc: Virden Illinois

I suggest people get their facks straight before forwarding anything they read on the net.

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

Gun deaths go down, death by other means goes up...Your point is?

wilpharm Loc: Oklahoma

No one is disputing the facts Robbie, Just wonder what YOU are saying??? what is the point of your post??? this has been argued for the last 2 weeks with no one on either side of the fence changing their minds a bit...Personally Im a life NRA member and am not apologizing to anyone about it...if that makes me a right-wing redneck gun-nut freak, so be it...just dont come into my house unannnounced...

soli Loc: London, UK.

Its a no brainer. The sale of deadly weapons has to be regulated. In UK I could not buy a shotgun without having my CV examined by the police & then there are stringent rules of how I housed it. I am sure this could certainly reduce the mindless shootings that are going on.

One Jughead Loc: Greene County, OH

I know why most citizens would want to protect themselves.
Where gun sales and concealed carry permits have gone up, violent crime has gone down. Criminals don't want to take a chance that their target is armed.

When we create GUN FREE ZONES the law abiding citizens abide by the rules, criminals don't and they have an open shooting gallery opportunity.

If you take away all the guns from the law abiding citizens, only the criminals will have them. Take a look at Illinois, the most stringent state in the U S for gun laws.

Here is one thing to consider when the law abiding citizen isn't allowed to have a gun.

Wow, is Illinois and Chicago great or what?
Perhaps the U.S. should pull out of Chicago?
Body count: In 2012 over 500 killed (murdered) in Chicago.
AND Chicago has one of the strictest gun laws in the entire US.
President: Barack Hussein Obama
Senator: Dick Durbin
House Representative: Jesse Jackson Jr.
Governor: Pat Quinn
House leader: Mike Madigan
Atty. Gen.: Lisa Madigan (daughter of Mike)
Mayor: Rahm Emanuel
The leadership in Illinois - all Democrats.
Thank you for the combat zone in Chicago.
Of course, they're all blaming each other.
Can't blame Republicans; there aren't any!

I fear for this (our) country.

dixiemegapixel Loc: Salemburg, NC

Lots of "fetishes" out there. Cars get faster and faster, some able to nearly quadruple most maximum posted speed limits. Faddish, blinding headlights make it nearly impossible for oncoming drivers to see the roadway in front of them. Jacked up vehicles, with bumpers as high as the roof of most cars. People with perceived, special privileges park in prohibited fire lanes. All potentially contribute to death and injury.

Malt alcohol is sold by the bottle at convenience stores and gas stations across our country.

Pitbull dogs maim and kill, but people still have them.

These have nothing to do with gun control. My point is this: We can have all kinds of laws and regulations, but if we are too weak or unable to enforce them, then what good are they?

soli Loc: London, UK.

Do you not realise that yours is the only country where you can get an arsenal without questions being asked. You consider that a right ? Get a life.

ted45 Loc: Delaware

Actually if you really look at history; the level of violent crime in the old west, when most people were walking around with a weapon, was much lower than it is today.

It is events like Sandy Hook that spur weapon sales. The press in their zeal to take away our guns make it look like there is a well armed maniac behind every tree, in every mall and school. People get paranoid and buy more guns to protect themselves. Some of those new owners probably should not have weapons but who isn't concerned with the safety of their families. Who would not want to protect them from this tsunami of crime the press warns us about every two minutes.

In reality our violent crime rate in total has been steadily dropping over the last decade.

ted45 Loc: Delaware

Do you realize that you have no idea what you are talking about? Buying a gun of any size legally in this country requires a ton of paper work and dozens of questions to be answered. Since you have such restrictive laws in the U.K. I would guess it is probably easier for a criminal to buy a gun there than it is here, but I don't live there so I don't spout off about life in your country.

BuddyLars Loc: Rockton, Illinois

I live in the state of Illinois (ILL-Annoy) and in this state you have to have a Firearm Owner Identification card. This card is issued through our State Police Department. Then when I buy a firearm I have to wait 3 business days before I can pick it up.
I do not know what the other states have for procedures, as you do not know either. You make it sound like we can walk into the 7-11 pick up a loaf of bread, some milk and a uzi.

ted45 Loc: Delaware

It is the same here. To legally buy a shotgun you must have a background check. The shooter in Sandy Hook was denied a legal purchase based on his background check. He killed his mother and stole her guns in order to kill others.

Same as were you live; a criminal has to get a gun illegally to commit his crime. If I am hearing the BBC news correctly that is exactly what goes on in your country.

sueyeisert Loc: New Jersey

These are two separate unrelated issues. I find it ironic that those who want freedom to buy guns would deny women freedom over their own bodies.

PNagy Loc: Missouri City, Texas

"By your logic Automobiles are responsible for deaths, not drivers.
Your logic would place the blame for pool drownings at the foot of the pool makers."

Nonsense. without automobiles and trucks our infrastructure would be unable to supply urban areas with food and other vital needs. That would lead to mass starvation. Moreover, automobiles and pools were not invented to kill people, whereas the very purpose of guns is to kill and to maim.

"My suggestion would be to hold people accountable for their actions."

We do hold people responsible for their actions. If a murderer is arrested he is tried, convicted, and sentenced. Of course, that is too late for the victims, but we cannot hold anyone responsible for actions he has not yet perpetrated.

"Tim McVeigh used a rented truck, 161 dead, was Avis the killer?"

Once again, the purpose of renting vehicles is not to maim and to kill, whereas that is the very purpose of guns. Moreover, the number of people killed in fertilizer bomb explosions has not increased since 1995. Since that time, however, there have been at least six times the Oklahoma City fatalities every year from gun murders alone, and additional carnage from accidental death and suicides.

"If someone is bent on killing, making guns illegal won't stop one death."

Totally untrue. The nations with strict gun control laws in the advanced industrialized world all have much lower gun murder rates than we do. Japan has only one fourteenth our murder rate.

"Only fact you omited is a CRIMINAL PULLED THE TRIGGER on every one of these ocassions. That and EVERY shooting at a school occured in a GUN FREE ZONE."

Anyone who commits a mass murderer becomes a criminal on the spot whatever he was till that point, so what is your point here?

"CHICAGO, the pinicle of democrat leadership just celebrated their 500th murder this year."

What is the implication, Democrats cause higher murder rates? There is no evidence for that.

"Look at the stats you neglect. Cities and states with the mmost stingent gun laws have the highest murder rates, highest violent crime rates. States with the highest percapita gun ownership have the lowest."

A 2008 Harvard Injury Control Research Center study concluded that concealed gun-carrying laws "have neither been highly beneficial nor highly detrimental.” The gun murder rates drop, but they are also dropping in other states, as well. As to states with strict gun control laws having an increase in gun murder rates, that is pure fiction. The top ten states with the strongest gun control laws have seen a drop in gun murders.

The matter of murder rates in cities with various kinds of gun control laws is a bit more problematic. Pro gun people like to point to the dearth of gun murders in Kennesaw, Georgia, where gun ownership is required. They studiously overlook the small population of the community (just over 30,000), and its relatively high income. The poor commit far more gun murders than the rich and middle income people.

"I am all for disarming the murdering scumbags, when you find out how to do that, fill me in."

There are good models for this; Japan, and nearly every Western European nation. Just reduce the guns that are in circulation to nearly none, and very few people will be able to get their hands on one. The US has the loosest gun control laws, and the highest gun murder rate in the advanced industrialized world.

The bottom line on guns is that they were invented for the purpose of killing and maiming more efficiently than the weapons that preceded them. In general, then, as statistics prove, the more guns the more carnage. Exceptions will always arise in complex situations, but they do not carry an argument. overall, arguing that guns reduce carnage is like espousing virginity through increased sexual intercourse, or sobriety through imbibing more alcohol.

PNagy Loc: Missouri City, Texas

This is interesting and well worked by gun right advocates, but irrelevant to the debate. There will be instances in which guns save lives, just as there are instances in which seat belts take them (by trapping a person in a burning car). Nevertheless, the net effect of seat belt use is to save more lives than they take, by preventing the most common cause of death in an automobile despite the instances in which guns protect lives, far more often they kill. They were invented for that purpose, and they do a great job of it. Arguing that increasing the prevalence of guns will depress the murder rate is as sensible as pretending that the way to cure obesity is to have three meals a day at a buffet.