NationStates Jolt Archive

Description: The Empire of Domzalski realizes it will have a tough time finding supporters of keeping a citizens right to own a gun intach whereas thousands of people are being killed by guns each year. But if one stops and thinks strongly about gun bans, they make no sense.

Who are we trying to keep guns from? Criminals and others who would use guns for means other then saftey.

But if you consider what "criminals and others who would use guns for means other then saftey" do, they both follow a pattern: THEY BREAK THE LAW.

If we take away guns we are simply taking guns away from the people who abide by the law. Gun bans will not ever be respected by the people who would use the guns for harm anyway. So what would gun bans really do: create a hazard for the people who abide by the law by limiting their saftey.

For those who take into account the accidental gun deaths, im sorry to report that they are very seldom. When taking into account total gun deaths within a given year, accidental gun deaths usually only accound for 1 or 2%.

By approving this proposal, citizens will still have the opportunity to defend themselves if faced by a gunman.

(This proposal is currently on page 12)

When I make gun registration legislation, I'm after the guy who doesn't know he's going to become a criminal. A tool that has no purpose other than to be used to KILL (even if it is a deterrence against someone else, that is still using it as a tool to kill/commit violence/etc) deserves no guaranteed rights.

Regardless, the argument that it won't deter criminals is a flawed argument. It will make criminals have a harder time to acquire any guns (mainly in cost). Further, this only really applies to the hard-core criminals - gangs, mofia, etc. The person that wants to hold up a convenience store for some quick cash - he's not going to be as interested in putting 5Gs down to get a gun imported. But if he can buy a gun for $100 at Wal Mart, he's not going to be thinking twice about the cost vs benefit. Further, armed youth crime will also drop - as most of it is youth getting access to guns through parents (look at just about any school shooting. Gun access was through parents.) Again, if a gang war starts, the gang might be able to get a hold of guns, but quite frankly - a group of 30-50 teenagers putting together 5Gs so that they can have ONE gun for the entire group to share for a gang war.....just doesn't seem right.

FURTHER: most people when they use a gun to try and rob you, they DON'T want to shoot you. If they have to, they will, but the DON'T WANT to do it. If you try to pull a gun on them, one of you two (probably you because you're already under the barrel) will be either injured or dead. Now ask yourself: is that 10G car (which is insured) worth your life?

Truthfully, it's not that hard to get a hold of guns that are already banned. It's not all that expensive either. If someone want's to kill someone else, they will find a way. It's also true that places where many citizens are known to carry guns don't see nearly as much crime and it makes sense. More people with guns = Less chance of criminal living. For them, going where gun laws are tighter is just good buisness sense.

It will make criminals have a harder time to acquire any guns (mainly in cost). Further, this only really applies to the hard-core criminals - gangs, mofia, etc. The person that wants to hold up a convenience store for some quick cash - he's not going to be as interested in putting 5Gs down to get a gun imported. But if he can buy a gun for $100 at Wal Mart, he's not going to be thinking twice about the cost vs benefit. Further, armed youth crime will also drop - as most of it is youth getting access to guns through parents (look at just about any school shooting. Gun access was through parents.) Again, if a gang war starts, the gang might be able to get a hold of guns, but quite frankly - a group of 30-50 teenagers putting together 5Gs so that they can have ONE gun for the entire group to share for a gang war.....just doesn't seem right.

Depending on who you go to, the average illegal AK-47 can be as little as $200. Keep in mind that, in some areas, that's cheaper than buying it legally. Bullets themselves are also not that expensive, due to how easy it is to convert a factory producing fireworks into one producing bullets. Hell, you can, if you know how to do it, buy scrap metal and fireworks in the U.S. and make your own bullets if you're really that concerned about cost. You only need a mold, and anyone who has worked with metal for any length of time can tell you that's not difficult to make. If you recycle spent cartridges, you save even more money by not having to remake part of the bullet. About the only real problem you will have is replacement parts for the gun if something goes wrong, but a smart gun owner will have those lying around anyway.

Really, it's not as difficult or expensive as you think to own and maintain illegal weapons.

Truthfully, it's not that hard to get a hold of guns that are already banned. It's not all that expensive either. If someone want's to kill someone else, they will find a way


Again, I'm less interested in the hard-core criminals (and it does add a layer of difficulty to the task). Small-time gigs are not going to be working with an illegally acquired AK-47 - they'll work with the handgun they were allowed to own for "household protection". Kids are going to have a harder time acquiring weapons. Those are the core arguments.


It's also true that places where many citizens are known to carry guns don't see nearly as much crime and it makes sense. More people with guns = Less chance of criminal living. For them, going where gun laws are tighter is just good buisness sense.


Is that RL or in-game stat you're using?

If RL - indicate context - 'cause that's just pure BS........ I'm thinking Canada vs US.....
How about major cities vs minor cities/rural areas.....
Heck, I'd think about the Alberta cities of Edmonton vs Calgary - only using knives instead of guns because you really don't hear about many gun shootings whatsoever....

If in-game, I can't possibly refute it based upon the fact that it just might be true for your region (BTW - Gun ban in Forgottenlands lead to crime dropping to zero. I think it went up slightly since - can't remember - but it is still minimal. On the other hand, Angel Fire - a puppet nation of mine - has legalized guns and it's crime has been everywhere from moderate to extreme. So therefore, I'd also claim it's BS in-game too).

Again, I'm less interested in the hard-core criminals (and it does add a layer of difficulty to the task). Small-time gigs are not going to be working with an illegally acquired AK-47 - they'll work with the handgun they were allowed to own for "household protection". Kids are going to have a harder time acquiring weapons. Those are the core arguments.

Depends on the small-time gig. If you're talking about your average run-of-the-mill American street gang, than likely they're going to have a few illegal weapons as well as legal ones. Many other small-time gigs, such as store robbers, that have experience with gun battles will also carry automatic weapons, just in case the cops arrive early and they must shoot their way out. If it's Joe-Blow robbing the supermarket, then they're as likely to have a gun as not.

If you're talking an Asian (Chinese specifically) small-gig, then you're talking automatics. Mainly because being shot to death is a better fate than prison.