This was my response to a post on gun control ( comments.deviantart.com/1/3432… ):
"There are several problems with that notion.
First, there are already plenty of cases throughout history where weapons restrictions have ended up leaving only criminals and "crazies" with the restricted weapons.
Second, while a gun makes a "crazy" more efficient, it is also more effective for self defense. The gun was the first weapon to remove the relative strength of the attacker and victim from the equation. To date, the only alternatives for self defense are "less lethal" weapons which are also generally banned outside the US anyway.
Third, the primary "crazies" gun advocates are concerned with are the government. In the event of an oppressive regime taking over the country through quasi-legal means in a fashion reminiscent of Nazi Germany, or by force as happened in the Bolshevik revolution, the ability to resist the new regime with force is vital. Under the last two Presidential administrations, the US government has unilaterally given itself powers to wiretap, collect a massive database of information on the public, kill US citizens without trial, detain foreign visitors indefinitely without recourse or explanation, detain citizens indefinitely without recourse or explanation, and it's tried to restructure the internet several times to gain the power to control it like several openly oppressive governments have demonstrated lately. It isn't paranoia to be afraid of a government doing all that to have the potential to grow into an evil authoritarian system instead of the flawed democracy it is now.
Fourth, there are already a plethora of laws in place to prevent high-risk individuals from obtaining guns. In almost every case, the individual not only acquired guns illegally, but also constructed their own bombs or other weapons. Assuming the over 90 million guns in the US were magically rounded up rather than being around and hidden for centuries to come, the "crazy" is not restricted by US laws which ban the manufacture of gas powered projectile weapons. Without those laws, it is relatively simple to construct a very lethal weapon with a higher rate of fire with modern technology.
Fifth, even if you assume everyone without a gun would magically behave themselves, the US still has very skewed violent crime rates. Our problem is not guns. Our problem is that we have a broken system that produces a criminal element at rates unseen outside Third World countries. If you look at the gun crimes, quite a lot of the deaths have to do with drug trafficking or drug abuse.
Sixth, if you actually cared about saving lives and believe gun control would do it, gun control wouldn't make your top 20 list. Even if you limit it to "easily preventable" and pretend gun control is easy, it wouldn't make your top 10. If you really want to save lives, go volunteer at a hospital. 100,000 die every year because nurses and doctors don't follow their own policy and make mistakes. If everyone who spent their time arguing for gun control spent that time volunteering to care for a patient, that number would easily be halved, which would be 5 times as many as are killed by guns in a year."
To avoid the link limit, I'm posting a journal to reply to the demand for citations. I have seen far more data than what is here, but it's enough for those who actually care about citation and aren't just using it as an exuse to dismiss an argument.
Point 1. Mexico stands as a prime example, with much lower gun ownership rates, while virtually identical death rates: tijuana.usconsulate.gov/tijuan… www.guardian.co.uk/news/databl… Compared with Canada, which is somewhat less restrictive, has double the ownership rates, and half the death rate.
Point 2. Unfortunately, the concept of relative strength in self defense is not something that makes its way onto CNN's website, so I'm left with more biased sources for a written description: www.wnd.com/2002/06/14164/
Point 3. If you need citations on these, you haven't been following the news at all:
- Wiretapping: www.reuters.com/article/2012/1…
- Database of information on the public: www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012…
- Kill US citizens without trial: www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/wor…
- Detain foreign visitors indefinitely: abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/g…
- Detain citizens indefinitely: www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12…
- Internet restructure: www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011…
Point 4. Since there's multiple parts to this, I'll break it out:
- High risk gun restrictions: www.atf.gov/publications/downl… section 922-C-4 on page 8
- Well over 90 million, one source claims 310 million, though I've seen others with lower numbers based on what is counted: www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL328…
- I'm not going to search for, let alone post instructions on how to build a massively lethal illegal firearm. I'd much rather people keep on using handguns and I have no idea who will read this. To mitigate the demand for a citation, though, look at a potato gun - something that can be lethal if misused, yet anyone can build. The principle has been applied by engineers to real weapons, which were banned for environmental concerns.
Point 5: US www.census.gov/compendia/stata… with 1.7 murders per 100k by non-firearm alone
- vs UK webarchive.nationalarchives.go… with 1.4 murders per 100k including firearms
- And for more on this, look up rape and robbery statistics between the two. I picked the UK for comparison because it was immediately available, but it works for all industrialized nations I've seen, so long as the murderer being counted is not the government.
Point 6: www.justice.org/cps/rde/justic…
- Listening to: The Protomen - Act IV
- Watching: Dr Who - Season 4 (1966)
- Drinking: Water