Tuesday, January 8, 2013

HOW CAN SOMEONE EVEN ARGUE AGAINST GUN CONTROL?

I'll give it my best shot...
Violent crime rates:
LINK: Violent crime rose after ban in Australia
"The Australian Bureau of Criminology states its murder rate in 2006 with firearms was the highest ever at 16.3 percent. The ban started in 1997."

"In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent, robbery 6.2 percent, sexual assault/rape 29.2 percent and overall crime rose 42.2 percent."

"Since the ban, Australian women are raped three times more often than American women. Using Australia as an model to lead people into a false sense of security that an anti-gun policy could create a safer society is an injustice."

LINK: Gun crime doubles in England after '96 ban
Gun crime has more than doubled since 1996, the year of the Dunblane massacre, according to the latest Home Office statistics.

In the year to April, there were 10,250 gun crimes - a rise of three per cent on 2001-02.

WATCH THIS 6 MINUTE VIDEO:



LINK: Mexico gun ban creates highest death toll in Mexico's history

"A new spate of violence has pushed the homicide rate in the Mexican border town of Ciudad Juarez to an unprecedented 1,701 murders, breaking the record set just a year earlier in 2008."

"Since February, some 8,500 Mexican soldiers have been deployed in Ciudad Juarez, but they have failed to stop ongoing violence between members of the Juarez and Sinaloa drug cartels."

Guns aren't to blame:

HERE'S A GRAPH OF THE TEN KILLERS IN THE U.S.


LINK: More people killed with hammers and clubs than rifles
"According to the FBI annual crime statistics, the number of murders committed annually with hammers and clubs far outnumbers the number of murders committed with a rifle."

"Think about it: In 2005, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 445, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 605. In 2006, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 438, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 618."

"
in 2011, there was 323 murders committed with a rifle but 496 murders committed with hammers and clubs."

It's not constitutional:

     "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -Thomas Jefferson

     Democide- the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder. There have been 262 million victims of democide in the last century.

      Understand that this number is equal to the entire adult population of the United States of America. This has been done between 1900-2000. In nearly every case of democide, the population was made to register their weapons, it was made illegal to sell said weapon or to pass it to children, and was consequently confiscated from the individual.

     The reality is that governments have killed more people in the last century than every war combined since written history has began. Why should I trust someone who says that they are in place to keep me free, yet at every turn I'm less free than I was the day before? Our government officials in this nation are elected to keep our freedoms from being erased, not to erase our freedoms. This was so important to the founders, that it was the second amendment to the constitution, not tenth, not fifteenth, but second. They had seen with their own eyes what a nation would do to its people if they weren't armed.

 
We would end mass attacks if we got rid of guns!!!
LINK: Chinese man mars 22 with knife same day as Newtown
    
     Here's the bottom line. All weapons are banned in prisons, yet criminals still find a way to kill people. CRIMINALS ALWAYS FIND A WAY TO KILL PEOPLE. Banning guns gives the criminal access to a weapon that law abiding citizens don't have. This gives the criminal and the criminally insane an advantage when it comes to robberies, rapes, and violent encounters of all kinds.

6 comments:

  1. Can there be a way to setup gun limitations in a way that it is satisfactory? Do we really need such heavy artillery for the populous?? Why does it need to be gun control or no control. Can just specific weapons be destroyed without unarming Americans?

    ReplyDelete
  2. That's what's so crazy Meghan. There's so much mis-information about guns. Most of the mass shootings that take place are by people who stole the guns. The limitations we have in place stopped those people from getting a gun legally. If you've ever seen a .223 round, it's not a heavy duty round by any means. It's a very small round. In fact, a lot of the special forces groups have gotten away from it and are using .308 rounds now. What I'm trying to say here, is that as long as fully automatic machine guns aren't in the hands of the general public, a gun is a gun.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "What I'm trying to say here, is that as long as fully automatic machine guns aren't in the hands of the general public, a gun is a gun." Can you clarify this statement? While I agree a gun is a gun and where there is a will there is a way... do we need, NEED, the automatic weapons

    ReplyDelete
  4. A full auto gun takes about a year and a TON of paperwork to get, costs you around $45-50,000. So the general public doesn't have automatic weapons. An AR-15 is a semi-automatic version of the M16. That means that you have to pull the trigger, one round goes down range, you have to reset the trigger, and repeat. A highly proficient gun user can empty a clip of 30 rounds accurately in about 10-15 seconds. Full auto in about 3 seconds.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Let me try to answer a few questions. First the general public doesn't have automatic machine guns.Some people do but they are pre 1986 and very old.They are really an investment tool. And NEVER in the history of the automatic gun ban has there ever been a shooting with a full auto that was in the agreement. Second, the guns they are after are semi auto with that hold more than 10 rounds. They say this will stop shootings, hardly! In the first ban Clinton put into law the Columbine shooting happen ban win in full swing and it didn't stop a thing. And last I want you to take some real time to think about this. While you do not need a gun today to fight the government, and you may never need one in your life. But are you so confident/arrogant that your kids wont? The second amendment is to protect us from the government nothing else. Guns keep leaders from becoming Hitler. If you are reading this its likely your a Christian, those guns you hate today are keeping those who hate Christianity away. Not the military but the fear that we have them.

    ReplyDelete