Will more gun control only create a larger black market and more violence?
YES
Side Score: 30
|
 |
NO
Side Score: 18
|
|
|
|
|
2
points
When the government intervenes in the market with extensive gun control, this will only lead to a larger black market because it eliminates the voluntary exchange of goods or services between two parties, thus, the black market will only increase and create more violence. Furthermore, when the founding fathers adopted the United States Constitution along with the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment was intended to supply the nation with guns if the current government oversteps its authority with exorbitant laws of tyranny through the elimination of freedom and liberty. Side: yes
3
points
2
points
"create more violence." this is one of the only parts i disagree with. the restrictions on guns in the UK are huge and we have very few gun related violence incidents http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/ "the Second Amendment was intended to supply the nation with guns if the current government oversteps its authority with exorbitant laws of tyranny through the elimination of freedom and liberty." you have got to remember this was ages ago, when the government wasn't very strong, and a rebellion was possible, its not in the US today i believe. (I'm tired so i might have read some things in the wrong context) (EDIT: and heres something i just found, don't know how accurate it is though) http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ Side: No
http://reason.com/archives/2002/11/01/ Side: yes
2
points
|
4
points
2
points
1
point
Even with extensive gun control regulations, what good would that do? How do criminals get guns? They break those extensive gun control laws and regulations. Why because they are criminals? How? Black market leads to the purchase of illegally obtained weapons. Laws and regulations are really only for law abiding citizens. For criminals, laws don't mean anything. Of these many countries, if I may assume, one probably be the UK, where the murder rates were ALREADY LOW BEFORE enacting gun control. Thus, their restrictive laws cannot be credited with lowering their crime rates. Gun control has done nothing to keep crime rates from rising in many of the nations that have imposed severe firearms restrictions. Side: yes
3
points
While I don't agree with gun control, I find this argument a bad assumption. There's no evidence to suggest the black market will get bigger. It's true if you squeeze a lemon you get more juice, but if you squeeze one that's already dry, it's going to yield no consequence. People who want guns will find them and the ones being used to kill are never legal NOW. Why would making them illegal make more of them? The law doesn't produce them or create an opposite effect, it's all arbitrary in this case. A law on gun control isn't going to make someone more or less prone to go get an illegal gun. They probably wanted illegal weapons in the first place. I don't agree with gun control policy, but only because it's ineffective, not because it will escalate. Side: No
1
point
If that is the case, then when prohibition was implemented, which meant alcohol was strictly forbidden, then why did it create a large black market for the consumption of alcohol. Because people wanted alcohol, and they willing to break the law even if they were law abiding citizens because they thought it was their fundamental right to consume alcohol. The same goes for guns, if guns were strictly forbidden, people will find alternative means, and black markets always creates more violence. Why? Because of the the product is illegal. In my case, if the government sanctioned the closing of all golf courses along with any participation due to environmental concerns, I would find alternative means of playing golf including the black market because I love golf that much. The facts remains that if the government prohibits the voluntarily exchange of goods and services, black markets are created, which then enlarge by violence due to the supply and demand of the product. Furthermore, if all golf courses were closed, there is no legal supply yet there is still a large demand to play golf. Therefore, the black market will create a very limited supply of golf, which subsequently, violence will ensue due to the low supply. People who want guns will find them and the ones being used to kill are never legal NOW That is wrong. Columbine shooters bought their weapons and ammo from a local gun market, and the Virginia Tech shooter bought his weapons on-line distributor. Guns Side: yes
2
points
1
point
with legally obtained guns just means more guns for criminals to get their hands on Legally obtained guns are bought and sold by law abiding citizens that protect them from non law abiding citizens. Criminals don't purchase guns from legally exchange or retail stores. Why? They are criminals, so they find other outlets in the black market. How will more gun control prevent mass gun massacres? They won't because insane people kill and that is impossible to control even with more laws and regulations. If they unable to purchase at the store, they will find other means. How many gun massacres have there been at gun conventions or gatherings with law abiding legal carrying gun owners? The simple answer is none. How many gun massacres happen in apparent gun free zones? Well, there has been a few at primary school and many at secondary schools such as Columbine, and the worst at post-secondary school, Virgina Tech. In both cases of Columbine and VT, the assailants were mentally ill without adequate help. Also, there has been the workplace, churches, mall, and diners. Well, they are vulnerable to those are criminals. Side: yes
Legally obtained guns are bought and sold by law abiding citizens that protect them from non law abiding citizens. Criminals don't purchase guns from legally exchange or retail stores. Why? They are criminals, so they find other outlets in the black market. I can vouch for this. When we buy our arms we always use a proxy, or buy from yard sales. We're not stupid enough to buy retail or at pawn shops. Who wants their name on a list? Side: yes
I realize I can't win this argument because apparently the idea that flooding society with legally obtained guns just means more guns for criminals to get their hands on, is just too bizarre a concept for most people on this site. It actually doesn't work this way. You can severely regulate arms so that no one owns any, or liberate them so that many people do, but the numbers for violence do not strictly increase or decrease with either. The third variable is culture. If you have a violent, corrupt culture then violence will find a way to exist. Side: yes
1
point
It seems natural to think that less guns means less violence, but you need to think reasonably: Criminal obtains gun illegally... government can do nothing about that no matter what. Criminal wants to rob a bank. Where would they go? Where's the safest place to do so? Somewhere where guns are allowed and citizens probably all have them, or somewhere where no one has any and rely TOTALLY on the police? Most people are good people; they'll follow a gun control law even if they disagree with it. Criminals don't care whether there is gun control laws or not, they are gonna get guns and they are gonna use them. Gun control only takes guns out of the hands of good, innocent people for the SOLE reason of making it hardly more difficult for a criminal to get a gun. If a criminal does decide to go on a shooting spree, where do you think he's gonna go? Side: yes
1
point
In a nation to which guns are so important, yes. Nations with stricter laws do not have the same gun-culture as the U.S does, and therefore cannot be used as examples. If a man who loves guns is not legally allowed to own one, he may obtain one illegally. The same is true of drugs. Our war against them has only served to create a vast criminal underclass of users, dealers and suppliers.
Side: No
1
point
|
