Sorry if this is not the place for that kind of discussion. I would like to be civil, please. Some people on Reddit were talking about how only dictators would want to disarm people.
Can I have some explanation on your opinion and why? I believe weapons should be banned and that crime should not exist in the first place. My opinion may change, but I believe there should somehow be strict rules regarding crime to reduce the amount of it and just have a place where it will not be worried about.
The reason you shouldn’t been weapons is very simple - you can’t.
Look at alcohol prohibition in the early 1900s. Virtually all alcohol production, storage, transport, sales, and consumption were banned. And what happened? Did people stop drinking? Did crime go down as predicted? No, quite the opposite. Crime went up because criminals now had a market for illegal goods. Prohibition was where organized crime got its real foothold in the USA.
Same thing is true with weapons. If you ban weapons, all of the law-abiding people will turn theirs in, and the criminals will not. This does not improve public safety. In fact it reduces public safety because now the criminals have weapons and the means to acquire more weapons, whereas the law abiding citizens are unarmed.
Id imagine it would reduce school shooters at least
Why would you think that? That a psychopath who often spends weeks or months planning to kill people is going to be dissuaded by that, when there are black market ways to purchase or construct a firearm of their own?
Evil men will always find the tools they need to dispense their evil.
Actually school shootings is a good reason for more guns not less. There have been a number of would-be mass shootings that have been stopped by armed Good Samaritans, either off duty police or civilians with carry permits. Much like overall crime, this is a distributed problem and you don’t usually fix distributed problems with centralized solutions.
Aren’t a ton of school shooters by a teenager who took his dad’s gun? How would he do that if dad doesn’t have a gun
Yeah but think that through. If you want to get rid of Dad’s gun, you have to get rid of pretty much every Dad’s gun. And that has significant effects beyond just school shootings. It means every parent who used a gun to defend their family from harm now is defenseless.
Every year there are about 10,000 to 15,000 firearm homicides. 100 or less are due to terrorism or spree shooting. In contrast, per Wikipedia, there are somewhere between 67,000 and a few million defensive gun uses each year. Most are where a criminal sees a gun and runs away. Take away Dad’s gun and you get rid of almost all those defensive uses. And maybe you stop some or most of the 100 spree shooting deaths. Seems to me like doing more harm than good.