Quote from: Beliathon on February 21, 2015, 03:24:55 AM

Quote from: Holliday on February 21, 2015, 03:17:58 AM

No, but put yourself in the shoes of a criminal. Do you prey upon those who have the means to defend themselves (and hurl tiny bits of accelerated metal back at you), or those who do not?

If everybody were armed, we would all be safer This tired old argument? That's all you've got? Really?

This argument promotes the micro-equivalent of mutually assured destruction (two armed and rational actors not engaging in conflict because it would destroy both) to justify higher levels of gun ownership, but it fails to work out when applied to reality.

Statistics show that guns do not make people safer, thus this pro-gun argument is demonstrably untrue on its face. Higher levels of gun ownership do not produce a safer society and often lead to a higher numbers of deaths due to gun violence.

According to the Violence Policy Centers analysis, states with higher per capita gun ownerships have far higher levels of gun homicidethere are 3 to 5 gun deaths per 100,000 in the bottom five gun ownership states, while there are 17 to 20 gun deaths per 100,000 in the top five gun ownership states. These statistics provide a great deal of evidence that gun ownership levels in a state correlate with gun deaths, and prove that the gun lobbys argument of universal gun ownership is simply a fantasy.

To further drive the statistics that guns dont make us safer home, we can simply look at the research surrounding household safety and gun ownership. In houses with firearms present, the average homicide rate is 3 times higher than in houses without guns and the suicide rate is between 3 and 5 times higher. Gun accidents due to improper storage or use of firearms claim the lives of hundreds of children a year. In households with firearms, domestic violence is both more prevalent than in houses without weapons, and has a much higher likelihood of resulting in violent deaths. In all possible rubricsself-defense, accidents and suicidegun ownership is detrimental to the safety of those who live in a gun-owners household; this is not to say that there are not cases of people defending their homes with their guns, but it is undeniable that gun ownership opens people up to numerous other risks.

In addition to the statistical evidence supporting the fact that more guns dont make us safer, we can simply look at the mechanics of a shooting. Shootings are chaotic and, if everybody has a gun, there is a very real potential for a crossfirenobody would know who the original shooter was, thus everybody would shoot at everybody else. In this crossfire, bullets would likely hit civilians (imagine a room filled with a crowd and three people shooting at each other) and the casualty count would increase. Once the police arrive, it would be difficult to determine who the original shooter was, and it is also likely that the police may end up shooting the people who didnt start the gunfight.

In response to the everybody should be armed argument, people should simply ask the gun activist whether or not they support Iran getting a nuclear weapon. By the logic that the gun activist applies, everybody is safer when everybody is armed, and this would translate to support for Iranian weapons; in reality, these people almost always say that Iran isnt a rational actor and that giving them a nuke endangers everybody around them. When they say this, you should simply tell them that not every gun owner is rational and that unrestricted gun ownership is the micro-equivalent to letting every country have nukes.

Quote from: Holliday on February 21, 2015, 03:20:51 AM

I won't force you to adhere to my methods and you don't force me to adhere to yours. Agreed?

No, I don't agree. In fact, I'm coming for you guns. I'm coming for all the guns, and I've got the weight of all future civilization behind me.

The older you get, the less relevant your tired worldview will become. Your grandchildren will not be armed, and there's nothing you can do to stop it.

Whoa whoa you are pulling facts out of your ass. Please stop being so ignorant and using false facts to support your false arguments.
Look here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state
Seems like the evidence is contrary. Higher gun ownership generally correlates to lower gun violence.
Look at this for example:
District of Columbia: 3.6% gun ownership and 16.5 gun murders, highest gun murder per capita in the USA and lowest gun ownership
Hmm, whos right here?