Do you think that America should change their gun laws? I live in Australia and it’s mind-boggling that people actually carry around guns.
If it would stop crime, yes but it does not even in YOUR country.http://s://winteryknight.com/2017/10/06/did-australias-ban-on-guns-lower-violent-crime-rates-and-lower-suicide-rates-2/If suicides and criminals cannot get guns, which is not true even in Australia, it does NOT lower the crime rate. A suicide is a suicide, robbery a robbery, a rape a rape, a murder a murder, gun or no gun.The USA’s Federal Bureau of Investigation though loath to admit it state that as many as 1,000,000+ crimes a year are prevented or aborted when a firearm is produced. 99.9% of the time NO SHOTS are fired.Not counting law enforcement, 30,000,000 (almost the total population of Australia) persons in the USA are licensed to carry firearms. The crime rate in the USA has been on a steady DECLINE in almost inverse proportion to the number of CC Permits issued. Highest incidents of crime seem to occur where stringent local gun laws are in effect.Of that 30,000,000 VERY few have ever been charged with and convicted of a crime, almost NONE involving a firearm.You have your laws we have ours. Yours are none of my business and mine none of yours to put it bluntly. This is the USA and a different culture and population than Australia. A gun ban in the USA would be met with MASSIVE non-compliance and a forced seizure met with revolt. Believe it even if some of our own politicians don’t.
Why doesn't America change its gun laws?
To understand it, you need to understand the culture in the United States. A couple of years ago, a man in Japan went nuts and deliberately drove his car into a crowd, killing several people. No one in Japan talked about banning cars. On another occasion, a Finnish high school student attempted (but apparently failed) to carry out a massacre at his school with gasoline bombs and an axe. Finland didn't have a discussion on axe or gasoline control.Now, of course, the difference is that all of the things I mentioned are useful items that were misused for violence, while guns are weapons whose sole purpose is killing. But the fact of life is there are times when you need a weapon and you need to kill someone to prevent a worse outcome. If you want to understand American attitudes toward guns, you have to understand that, for many people, a law abiding citizen owning a gun is at least as basic a right as owning a car or an axe. To suggest that, because criminals use guns for evil, you need to restrict my right to own a gun means that you're curtailing my freedoms to act as I see fit, because you can't distinguish between criminals and decent citizens.One practical note. I don't know how Australia deals with home protection, particularly in rural areas where police response is necessarily limited. There was a case in the US last year where an 18 year old woman whose husband had just died in Iraq was at home alone with her month-old baby. Two men armed with knives started trying to break into her house, so she called the police. It became obvious that the police wouldn't get there before the men got inside, so she got her gun. One of the men got inside and came at her, so she shot him and the other fled. Now, this may be an unusual circumstance, but it is almost certain that, had that woman not been armed, she would have been raped and murdered in front of her child. That gun, being a weapon of death, prevented something much worse from happening. Now, I know the statistics about gun crime vs guns preventing crime, and those can be argued about all day, but there is something deep in the American culture of self-reliance and independence that bristles at the idea that I should not be allowed weapons to defend myself, but should instead wait and hope that the authorities can protect me. It's not universal, but it's common among Americans to feel like stripping me of that power is to strip me of a basic liberty.
Why does a blue state like Vermont have red state gun laws?
Is there no one here from Vermont or New Hampshire who can explain what life up there is like? Vermont is an enigma of contradictions. They are what could truly be called "independents" because of the unique variety of beliefs there. On some issues they're more liberal than Lenin, and on others they make Charlemagne look like he's a bleeding heart. Vermont and New Hampshire are small enough that a variable panoply of beliefs can exist, and in this way they're a microcosm of the rest of the country. That's why so much attention is paid to NH during the primaries.
What are the airsoft laws in Washington State?
I live in Bellevue, Washington, my friends and I want to have an airsoft war, where can we have it? Does it have to be on private property, or can we do it in a park (being extraordinarily cautious of course)? Are there any laws we have to follow? Any restrictions on the types of guns? Thanks.
Is Vermont a red neck state? After all they have the most lax gun laws in the Union.?
. . . and one of the lowest crime rates. DC has one of the strictest and the highest crime rate. Thus once again illustrating that the cause of gun crime is not the possession or regulation of guns, but the culture of the people who live in a given area.