Two Bulls Fans Shot in Philadelphia After Chicago’s Win

lol

that only works in the long run and just if the whole country bans fire-arms.
the key to less violence is more education and a higher degree of social justice but i wont get into that now, back to rifles: in london they have big a** problems with knife- and armed crime in general so they have special police patrols especially at these times of the day when most violent outbursts happen and they are randomly pulling over people on the streets and search them for weapons. so they get a big load of shanks and also guns off the street.
there are way less available than in the us coz these are illegal in the whole uk, so you ll find less guns in the ghetto there than youll find in a white us-american suburb. so even in areas with pressing “poverty”, inequality, etc sh*t is really escalating and dangerous but since they started to disarm people the homicide rate decreased between 2003 (204 homicides) and 2010 (136 homicides) . its simple as that: less guns = less victims. even in the “ghetto”

Actually, the “statistics” you speak say the exact opposite, which is why I asked you to explain that statement. Passing country laws for big city issues have done nothing to lower violent crime rates. Concealed carry laws haven’t stemmed shootings in inner cities.

the way I see it is that those who would use guns in a violent way are most likely going to get those guns illegally. However, if the threat of others holding weapons is out there….People will be less likely to hold up a seven eleven with a gun when he knows anyone around him could have a gun.

http://www.uwplatt.edu/~wiegmake/Intro_Files/CJ%20-%20paper%20example.pdf

well looks like I was getting most of my information from outside of the U.S….interesting

It’s definitely true that the U.S. would be better equipped to enforce a law like this than a lot of countries. I still don’t believe that they would be entirely successful, but things would definitely change. Then there is the discussion about how the balance of power would change and potential abuse of power, but I think that the more important issue in all of this is societal values and attitudes. I think the fact that two teenagers were willing to use deadly force in a situation like this is more concerning than the fact that their weapon of choice was a gun. Certainly this is an individual circumstance, but I think that the issue is much deeper than simple access to weapons. Guns are a means to carry out acts of violence, but they are not a direct cause of violence.

This is an especially relevant topic in light of the recent tragedies in Connecticut and Oregon. Had those two men not had access to guns, things may have played out very differently. They were obviously extremely troubled individuals, but the increasing trend of random violence against innocent people is saddening and concerning. History has proven that people will try to hurt each other, regardless of the weapons available to them. Restricting access to guns undoubtedly reduces the ability of an individual to carry out massive acts of violence. Unfortunately, it does not eliminate it. There was also a knife attack at an elementary school in China this morning that left 22 children seriously wounded. Things like this are unexplainable. My point in this long-winded paragraph is that any type of weapon is only one factor out of several when considering an act of violence. I believe that psychological and sociological factors play a much larger role in situations like this, and I think those factors should be discussed more than what weapons people should be allowed to have. This is a somewhat idealist stance, because humans will remain human. Violence is an unfortunate part of our existence, and there are no easy answers or solutions. Personally, I believe individuals should be allowed to own guns, but events like these are saddening and disheartening, and I’m really not sure what the right answer is. Although guns may not be outlawed anytime soon, I’m sure that this debate will become increasingly relevant in the months and years to come. Thanks for a good discussion, and for being reasonable and charitable. Those are rare qualities on the internet.

thats not about a way to see it. the facts are quite simple: wherever you get guns the more gun crime you have. and thinking to carry a gun would help you anyhow is a little naive http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17922-carrying-a-gun-increases-risk-of-getting-shot-and-killed.html