A question for places with strict gun control.

[diyandsave+62]

Has it worked? Wow, I was going to add a smily, but most of them are really violent.

p.s. I support gun ownership not limited to hunting and target shooting.

[Pick-Fu]

I support the 2nd amendment and it says "shall not be infringed"
I moved from Ca because of their insane gun control laws and if Oregon tries it, I will move to a free state.

[Werewolf]

I am from belgium , where we have quite strict gun laws.
Violent crimes here are very rare. Shooting incidents rarely happen.

I have 2 pistols myself , and had to go through some procedures to get them. Background checks , gun safety training , ect.
There are a few guys i know that have semi-automatic rifles (AR15 , FAL and the likes) , but there is a lot of paperwork involved.
Personally , i think we have a pretty good system. Firearms enthousiasts will go through the troubles to get thier toys and crimimals don't have easy acces to guns.

[AppendixG]

I am from belgium , where we have quite strict gun laws.
Violent crimes here are very rare. Shooting incidents rarely happen.

I am a die hard liberal from a state with a large hunting population. By and large, I support common sense gun control but, realistically, my stance is that, in America, any kind of meaningful gun control action is hundreds of years too late to be effective. There are so many guns in circulation that, if somebody wants one, they're going to find one whether they're legal or illegal. You just can't "fix" that, not that I'm arguing that it needs to be fixed, I'm just saying that I think that the call to ban firearms is misguided and idealistic.

At this rate, if the purpose is to eliminate guns, the only way to accomplish that is to ban their manufacture and wait 400 years for every gun currently in circulation to break. That's just not reasonable. Because of that, I personally only support actions that I think will be more effective at stopping gun violence rather than preventing gun ownership.

[mdc5150]

I support the 2nd amendment and it says "shall not be infringed"
I moved from Ca because of their insane gun control laws and if Oregon tries it, I will move to a free state.

Arizona is a great place to live for gun owners. Not only the laws but the culture as well. The only people who fear out when they see someone carrying a gun are the visitors from places like California. It is rare to hear of someone legally carrying a gun misbehaving but you do hear a lot of people defending themselves successfully or intervening and stopping a violent crime. That's local news of course not national news.

[Pick-Fu]

I am from belgium , where we have quite strict gun laws.
Violent crimes here are very rare. Shooting incidents rarely happen.

I am a die hard liberal from a state with a large hunting population. By and large, I support common sense gun control but, realistically, my stance is that, in America, any kind of meaningful gun control action is hundreds of years too late to be effective. There are so many guns in circulation that, if somebody wants one, they're going to find one whether they're legal or illegal. You just can't "fix" that, not that I'm arguing that it needs to be fixed, I'm just saying that I think that the call to ban firearms is misguided and idealistic.

At this rate, if the purpose is to eliminate guns, the only way to accomplish that is to ban their manufacture and wait 400 years for every gun currently in circulation to break. That's just not reasonable. Because of that, I personally only support actions that I think will be more effective at stopping gun violence rather than preventing gun ownership.

There is not such thing as "Gun Violence" There is people violence. Guns can do nothing on their own. I hate that term and other terms that liberals put out there to make it seem like guns are scary and will kill you on their own. There is NO law or executive order or anything else that you can add to the over 22,000 gun laws we ALREADY in this country that will make a difference... criminals will do what ever they want and you are only affecting "LEGAL GUN OWNERS" with more stupid laws that do nothing but make us into criminals.

out of the 33,000 gun deaths that liberals like to quote, only about 3,000 or so are not suicide, gang killings or justified shoots by police. Taking those numbers into account... the US falls WAY down the list.

[Pick-Fu]

I support the 2nd amendment and it says "shall not be infringed"
I moved from Ca because of their insane gun control laws and if Oregon tries it, I will move to a free state.

Arizona is a great place to live for gun owners. Not only the laws but the culture as well. The only people who fear out when they see someone carrying a gun are the visitors from places like California. It is rare to hear of someone legally carrying a gun misbehaving but you do hear a lot of people defending themselves successfully or intervening and stopping a violent crime. That's local news of course not national news.

My uncle has some property there and if it comes down to it, I would move there... there are between 1,000,000 to 3,000,000 crimes stopped by a "good guy with a gun" every single year (FBI stats) but liberals dont want to hear that, they inflate numbers to make it seem like there is a "gun violence" epidemic in the country so they can enact more and more gun control laws that will do nothing but take away "RIGHT" to self protection. I would like to see what they would do if conservatives started making laws that outlawed free speech unless you took a class, got training, passed a test and paid their extortion money so that they could exercise their "RIGHT" to free speech.

[diyandsave+62]

appendixG, thank you for not being a knee jerk type of liberal. Most American gun control is not based on common sense, but rather on the gun is the problem. Yes, guns are deadly, in the hands of the wrong person, just like knives. There are enough laws to put a mass shooter away for life, new ones only work against the law abiding people.

I have been doing some soul searching because of all of the shootings in the news. As I am a gun owner and also work in the industry. This is why I joined this group, I am upgrading my safe and will be running ideas past members here. I realize that the media is hyping the bad and ignoring the beneficial uses of firearms. My worst fear is that the US becomes over ran with terrorism and we won't have the means to defend ourselves. If all guns disappeared tomorrow, I would have a gun the next day, homemade. If not there are knives, spears, clubs and yes, trucks.

Pick-Fu, look at what our Governor, Kate Brown, is trying to do. She will be trying to band extended capacity magazines (her words). Rally your friends and call your state reps.

Sounds like things are good in Belgium but what about France, Germany (sexual attacks by immigrants) or Great Britain (save a life, turn in a knife). The world is going to sh1t, do you want to be a victim or defend yourself? I guess my soul searching is over. The right to defend yourself should never be surrendered.

Stay safe, DIY.

[WestCoastPicks]

I'm Canadian. We have reasonable gun laws. As a result our gun death is over 100 times lower per person compared to the US.

Of our gun deaths, a vast majority of those guns came across the border illegally from the US.

This is what you call restriction. I own 2 shot guns (a 410 and a 12) 2 rifles (22lr and a 30) and 3 handguns.

Nobody wants to take the guns away, they just want to restrict the types of guns you can own and the rates of fire.

A little change (don't think it's possible in the US) could drop your gun deaths over 100 times. But everyone wants to walk around with an inflated chest holding on to their man killers. They could care less how many innocent people they kill every year. It's obvious. That gun that has done you zero good, comes at a cost. The cost is human lives, you all know it. But choose not to care.

Nothing I've said here is new. It is all backed up by statistics. Ultimately it's up to you Americans. If you don't care how many innocent people are being slaughtered on a daily basis just so you can have a machine someone made for killing other people, that's your choice.

Selfish, petty and antisocial as it might be.

[AppendixG]

There is not such thing as "Gun Violence" There is people violence. Guns can do nothing on their own.

You are, of course, right and I admit that the terminology simplifies a complex issue. What I mean by "gun violence" are violent acts that are facilitated — or enhanced — by the use of a gun. At their root, they aren't caused by guns, they are modified by them, just like vehicular manslaughter is manslaughter that is modified by the use of a vehicle or domestic abuse is abuse that is modified by the presence of a domestic relationship. You can't stop manslaughter by banning cars and you can't stop murder by banning guns. However, it is my belief — and that's all it is — that you can take steps to rein in the severity and frequency of such modified things by controlling the modifier.

Theoretically, you could end vehicular manslaughter by getting rid of cars and you could end (what I called) gun violence by getting rid of guns. Obviously, those are unreasonable solutions. For me, the workable solution lies in finding a balance between preservation of the Second Amendment and protection of the population at large. And, I agree with you: the root of violence is people. As such, I think any working solution will need to be founded upon a reevaluation of America's mental health system so that potentially violent people can seek help, unfettered, should they need it. Anyway, just like we've created laws to prevent drunk driving — and curb frequency of deaths by vehicle — I think that we can reasonably implement similar checks with little impact on law abiding, responsible gun owners.

appendixG, thank you for not being a knee jerk type of liberal. Most American gun control is not based on common sense, but rather on the gun is the problem. Yes, guns are deadly, in the hands of the wrong person, just like knives. There are enough laws to put a mass shooter away for life, new ones only work against the law abiding people.

Thank you for the compliment, I try to remain open minded about my opinions and, especially on this one, I get a lot of flak from my largely liberal group of friends. I agree with your fundamental premise: that overreaching restrictions on ownership will only affect law abiding citizens. If a criminal wants a gun, they're going to buy one from a friend or steal one. I don't think you can effectively stop criminal gun violence, not with laws not with punishments and not with restrictions.

I think, if you're going to attack the problem, the most effective route would be to make it easy for people suffering from mental illness — or people, or families of people in the throes of some violent psychotic break — to seek help.

[Pick-Fu]

westcoastpicks,

We have around 150,000,000 people in the US who own firearms and never go out and shoot anyone with any of them so this "man killer" lable is BS and you know it. Every gun if used improperly has the potential to kill a person just as well as a baseball bat has the same potential to kill people. Even a car, or a screwdriver, or cow shit (can be made into a bomb)

so lets do some numbers together...

there are over 350,000,000 guns in the US with about the same number of people..
33,000 deaths that the left relates to guns each year, lets break that down
over 1/2 of that is suiside (terrible to think that someone would take their own life) so now we are down to 16,500
now lets take away the murder by gang members and the deaths by cops, we are now around 3,000 deaths by neglegent discharge or outright murder (which is hardly ever done with an AR15 or AK47 style rifle)

So lets devide the 3,000 by the number of people in the country 3000/350000000 = .00001%
you are less likely to die in the US by gun then you are crossing the street in a crosswalk
Do the math for Canada and see if you come up with the same % I wish my computer wouldnt have crashed because I had a list of broken down that showed that people in Canada had a greater chance of death by firearm then we do.

I carry a concealed handgun every day to protect myself and my family (im getting older and cannot go hand to hand as good as I once did) and now we are letting unvetted islamists into the country and they are killing our people, I myself want the option to own an AR15 (modern sporting rifle) to protect myself against superior firepower that a criminal can get.

Venesuala (ok cant spell today) has a no guns policy but is the murder captial of the world per capita... explain that one
Every country that outright bans the citizens right to have a firearm has a higher violent crime rate (may not be guns but they just use other weapons.) If they outlawed guns in the US people would just use a bomb to create mass murder, or a truck like in France.
A guy in China killed over 30 people with a knife (I think it was china, maybe japan) so should there be a total knife ban?

Dr's in the US kill more people then guns, outlaw Drs?
Cars kill more people in the US then guns, outlaw cars?
Alcohol kills more people in the US then guns, go back to prohibition?

When will people learn its not a tool that is the issue but evil people (cough: mostly liberals : cough) that go around shooting people

Do you know who backs gun control the most? Gang members! they want unarmed targets.... no thanks, I will stay in the US and keep the ability for self preservation with my firearm

[Pick-Fu]

opps, I forgot to add... our problem is not guns, Its our judicial system not putting people away that are criminal gang members.

a point.. a guy in Oregon felt threatened and pulled his firearm to get protesters away from him and he gets charged with 2 felonys
a guy in Chicago (felon) gets caught with a firearm and the DA has him plea down to a misdemeanor and never sees jail time.

Who out of those 2 people do you think has more of a chance of murder? The guy in jail for trying to save himself from angry protesters or a gang member who they wont put away and he knows it?

[AppendixG]

When will people learn its not a tool that is the issue but evil people (cough: mostly liberals : cough) that go around shooting people

This is a problem.

When you resort to name calling and insinuation and approach the issue with an "us versus them" mentality, you forego the possibility of reasonable discussion. Both parties dig in their heels and refuse to compromise because it's been elevated into a battle against ideals rather than a battle of ideas.

opps, I forgot to add... our problem is not guns, Its our judicial system not putting people away that are criminal gang members.

We already have a reputation as the incarceration capital of the world, I don't think more people behind bars is the solution. Don't treat the symptom, treat the underlying cause. Don't bandage a festering wound, disinfect it.

As a liberal, do I believe that individuals in America — as it exists right now — need to own powerful assault rifles? No, I do not. But that's not the point and my belief is irrelevant. Those weapons exist and they aren't going anywhere. They're going to be in circulation — and in serviceable condition — for decades. You can lock people up for owning them, you can lock people up for using them, you can lock people up for misusing them... it's not going to accomplish anything because humans have the capacity for violence and those guns will still exist and will continue to increase the severity of violent crimes.

In my opinion, the issue isn't solely guns. It isn't solely "gang members." The issue is that people — not all of them, but enough of them — are impulsive, irrational and violent. Until you address that angle of the problem, you're spinning your wheels.

[Pick-Fu]

We are the incarseration capital of the world because we put people in jail for stupid crap and let the high crime people out!!

We have so many people in prison right now because they got caught with pot, that is not a prison offence or they are in jail for not paying tickets or not paying child support or a list of other stupid offenses.

Sorry but I hear so much us vrs them from the other side its hard not to go back at them with facts that refute their claims. I normally dont like to get into these discussions because those who want gun control wont listen to reason.. they dont care about facts, they just know in their heart that guns are bad and no one should have them... (I know, I have a liberal gay nephew who spouts this all the time)

I think its time I bow out of this discusion, I posted facts and there is nothing more I can say because it wont ever change the mind of someone who wants gun control.. just like nothing will ever change the mind of someone who believes that the 2nd amendment was put there for the very reason we see today, gun control advocates

[Josephus]

I'm Canadian. We have reasonable gun laws. As a result our gun death is over 100 times lower per person compared to the US...It is all backed up by statistics.

Firearm-related death rate per 100,000 population per year:

United States Total: 10.54 Homicides: 3.43
Canada Total: 1.97 Homicides: 0.38

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... death_rate

I am from belgium , where we have quite strict gun laws.
Violent crimes here are very rare. Shooting incidents rarely happen.

Are you sure? The US loves to air out their dirty laundry. Our news media lives off of it. Few other countries do this.

Annual Death Rate from Mass Public Shootings:

Belgium 0.128
US 0.089
Canada 0.032

**Edit** I should have used this instead, from the same source, comparing frequency instead of death rate. I'm sorry and I'll leave the other bit up just for interest:

Frequency of Mass Public Shootings:

Belgium 0.179
US 0.078
Canada 0.056

http://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/compar ... nd-europe/

Personally I think It has to do with cultural value clashes. More homogeneous values equates to less violence in developed countries. The amount and variety of guns has been increasing in the US forever while the death rate has been decreasing for decades, even outpacing the decline after severe gun limitations such as was done in Australia. The only good correlation is within the motive portion of "means, motive, and opportunity". But this isn't the place for an essay.