Gun Bans

Does gun control work? If it does, then we should ban them all.

Does gun control work? If it does, then we should ban them all. If it doesn't work, then virtually all gun control is unreasonable! Pick one. So why can't they show evidence that it actually works? (At least no evidence that can survive any scrutiny/critical thinking).

ℹ️ Info

~ Aristotle Sabouni
Created: 2022-04-27

What about an "all out gun ban?

If gun control works, then it would be reasonable to take them all! If it doesn't work, then virtually all gun control is unreasonable! Pick one.

The worst mass murders were done with box cutters, bombs, or in countries with the strictest gun-control, so we know it doesn't work. Thus, "nobody wants to take your guns" or "we just want a few 'reasonable controls'" are both lies. Whether Gun-controllers are lying to us, themselves or both doesn't matter. I've never met the gun-controller that would be satisfied with X, when X means their neighbors will still have guns, and mass murders/crimes will still happen with guns. X is always the beginning to Y (a police state). Thus compromising is compromising towards a police state. We know that (a) "gun control" is a fraud (b) the liars aren't being reasonable (honest) (c) that Prohibition failed miserably with Alcohol, Drugs, Music/Software piracy, which are harder than it is to make/smuggle guns. Why do the gun-controllers think this will be the one exception where prohibition will work?

Do gun bans work?

Nope. Not that we can tell, or at least not what we intend it for, or we wouldn't be having this debate. Why would criminals obey the law? Why would people that don't believe in the law, obey it? Thus all it can do is empower criminals, and turn gun owners into criminals.

The gun-controllers will throw out various logical fallacies to support their position, but each crumbles under the slightest scrutiny or information: which is why they try to shout it down or oppress those that know the facts and keep their low information supporters, their supporters. I have yet to meet a high information (and honest) gun controller.

Doesn't the U.S. has the most/worst mass murders? Nope. Places with strict gun control or bans like Russia, India, Norway, Germany, France, all don't look so good.

Does Gun Control stop mass murders? The biggest mass murders have been in places with strict gun control, far stricter than in the U.S. and would never work here. And in fact, virtually all of the mass shootings in the U.S. were either done by government forces, or in gun-free zones because shooters are smart enough to pick places where people can't shoot back.

The media/left claims U.S. murder/crime rate is higher than other nations, but is it true?

Not so much. The U.S. ranks #121 safest out of 218 countries (middle of the pack), but #4 safest out of 49 counties in our hemisphere. And our crimes and murders are trending better than most other countries. When you adjust for culture/race/immigration? You find we're even better.

Basics: If gun control worked (or guns caused crimes), we'd be the worst in the world. And places like Sweden, Israel that also have lots of guns would have been crime ridden miseries (they aren't). Our crime and murders have been trending down whereas most of the AOCE countries have been trending up (despite gun control). Many will try to cherry pick either "gun crimes" instead of all crimes to lie. As if you'd rather be beaten to death with a club over being shot, or raped at knife point over gunpoint. The rational care about crime/murder, not the tools used. NOTE: your survivability rate over being stabbed isn't higher than being shot (the uninformed don't know better), and people will stab you quicker than shoot you, because it is quieter. Gun control wouldn't reduce availability in the U.S. for generations (at best) so is wasted effort assuming you want to help crime/murder in your lifetime. Many will cherry pick by country -- but a lot of that is flim-flam. They pick the U.K, Canada, Australia... and then if you show them how their numbers were faked, or show facts they don't like, are they reasonable? Or do they change the topic?

Would murder or mass murder go down with gun control?
Not that we can tell. There's a cost/benefit to guns. While the left will lie and pretend there are no mass shootings that have been stopped by civilians, the facts disagree. Defensive Gun Uses (DGU) are common in the U.S. That's how many times guns are used for good (to stop a crime, or for "defense") as opposed to doing harm: best estimates are that guns are used in ≈5,000 murders per year (only about 1/2 of murders), but they're used about 2.2 million times a year to stop a crime. Do the logic on what happens if those crimes aren't stopped.

What about all the gun controllers who disagree?

A law is a reflection of the authors and advocates: if they aren't informed, then the laws they write aren't going to be reasonable. Virtually everyone that learns the facts switches sides. The vast majority of gun controllers (like the ones listed), are uninformed with no understanding of the tool, history of gun control laws, or the efficacy of what they propose -- thus what they propose isn't "reasonable".

The question is should society be run as an idiocracy? Where the will of the uninformed overrides the rights of everyone else? Because that's what this fight is fundamentally about: politically correct disinformation or ignorance winning out over gun owners individual rights and the constitution.

🔗 More

Gun FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions (and answers) about Guns, or the Gun Control debate.

Tags: Gun FAQ/tab