Quote from: Cnut237 on Today at 10:38:50 AM

And more stringent rules on gun ownership (such as, no-one is allowed to own a gun), might also be a sensible idea.

I am not surprised that you say that because the left usually offers supposed solutions to problems by prohibiting and forcing. In this case it would be to prohibit everyone from owning guns.

I have searched on the subject because although I don't like over-regulation in principle, if I saw that banning guns would lead to 0 murders, I would support a total ban. But searching I find a variety of events that don't give such an easy result as I ban guns = gun murders end.

Japan would be a place where guns are banned and they have no murders but it comes from the context of losing WW2 when they thought they were God's country, the shock of losing the war and the change in mentality it brought about. In Australia they banned guns and it seems to have worked. But for example, in Venezuela they banned guns 10 years ago and it is one of the countries with more gun murders in the world, in Colombia something similar happes and then you have Switzerland which is a pacifist country with a heavily armed population.

So, again, this is not a black and white issue where it is guaranteed that if you ban gun ownership you are going to get rid of shootings.

Quote from: Cnut237 on Today at 10:38:50 AM

There is no need for anyone in the UK to own a gun.

There is also no need to wear earrings or get tattoos and we are not going to ban them, right? I can give you countless examples of things that are not necessary and no one would think of banning them.

Quote from: Cnut237 on Today at 10:38:50 AM

We don't have dangerous wildlife, no bears or hippos etc. You don't need an AK-47 to fend off a disgruntled pigeon.

I understand that this is hyperbole because you must be crazy in the UK if you license AK-47s to kill birds.

By banning gun ownership you would be punishing 600,000 people for what a madman has done.