How come whenever there is a horrific gun crime,everyone gets in a uproar saying we need more gun control,or ban them?

How come whenever there is a horrific gun crime,everyone gets in a uproar saying we need more gun control,or ban them= altogether,but more people are killed by bad and drunk drivers each year,in both Canada and the US,but nobody is saying ban the car or truck,or even booze for that matter?P.S. Sorry about any spelling mistakes sure wish they would reinstall the spell check for people that use IE. Asked by Squeeky-changes-suck 10 months ago Similar questions: horrific gun crime uproar control ban them= Politics & Law > Issues.

Similar questions: horrific gun crime uproar control ban them.

I'm glad that we live in a society that questions the causes of violence. We might not always know the answers - but in a caring society such as ours, we should NEVER become immune to acts of violence, and if it turns out that video games, TV and movies, inadequate handgun controls, or any other feature of our society is contributing to that horror, let's address it. That's only going to happen if we keep exploring causes.

We'll never eliminate violence; it's a part of life. But it's our humanitarian obligation to seek peaceful solutions and societal reforms that minimize preventable tragedies.

Thanks for you reply Goldie. But is making more gun control,really going to address the issue,some idiot going to do gun violence,isn't going to give a crap about weather the firearm is legal or not. It's only punishing the innocent lawabiding firearm owner,with more red tape and rules to follow.

Squeeky-changes-suck 10 months ago .

Well, in countries that have stricter gun control, there are FAR fewer deaths by handguns. Will SOME criminals still get guns? Sure.

Will some people who are hell bent on violence build bombs instead? Of course. But by encouraging guns the way we do, and have a culture that reveres guns and wants the most rapid fire cartridges we can get?

Some of those are going to fall into the hands of people who should not have guns, and would not otherwise get one. Then they get a clip capable of firing many shots into a crowd, or a school, or a workplace and we have a tragedy that MIGHT have been prevented. Maybe.

It is a natural reaction by some people who are upset by the violence and it is a political statement by others. Sometimes it is hard to know the difference. The mistake the gun control people make is thinking that banning guns will keep the bad guys who use them illegally from getting them.

The only thing it would do is keep law abiding citizens from protecting themselves.

VERY TRUE! Thanks for your reply. Squeeky-changes-suck 10 months ago .

A more cynical version of Goldie's answer: because we feel the need to talk. The tensions between gun advocates and gun control advocates never go away. There are nearly 10,000 gun homicides a year in the US.It's an issue that deserves to be talked about.

But most of the time, we don't. It just slips into the background.So... a national tragedy comes along, and we have this big awkward national moment of silence.So we talk to fill the silence, and it's the conversation we would have been having all along. The tragedy itself doesn't really change things (what's another 6 deaths on top of 8,000?

) but any other topic feels out of place. Of course there's nothing new to contribute, just an opportunity for people to say the same old things all over again.

Very true. Thanks for your reply,Pam. Squeeky-changes-suck 10 months ago .

Never let a good catastrophe go to waste"we have already banned drunk driving, and there are a lot more people who do not use firearms on a daily basis than there are people who don't use motor vehicles on a daily basis. Also, the US tried banning booze, with poor results. Overall, it results in a sense of futility over drunk driving, where there is still a perception out there (though not universally believed) that if you write the right gun control law, gun violence will magically go away.(obviously I am one of those who believes that new laws will not affect those who already disobey the old laws)the situation I use to illustrate this is that several years back, a drunk driver struck and killed 4 girls walking home from a movie theater.

The city reacted by reducing the speed limit around the theater. The conclusion to be drawn is that a drunk driver, though he was disobeying the law about driving while drunk, would obey the speed limit.

OMG,aint that the truth someone disobeying an old law,sure is heck aint going to obey a new one. Thanks for your input TLW,always like hearing what you have to say. Squeeky-changes-suck 10 months ago .

Squeeky.....this answers some of this:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandering_%28polit... org/wiki/Pandering_%28politics%29.

Thanks maggo. Squeeky-changes-suck 10 months ago .

I know,and yes it was a very sad and horrific crime,but leave me and my legally owned firearms out of it. Make the slugs and thugs PAY fot their crimes,not us law abiding firearm owners. Thanks for you input.

Squeeky-changes-suck 10 months ago .

There's a lot of misunderstanding about people that want more gun control. A civilian buying an additional clip that carries 32 bullets (like our Arizona shooter) is up to no good. That is what should be outlawed by legitimate gun dealers.No one wants to take guns away from hunters, home owners and business owners who are protecting their property against intruders.

Why is it that we get a little crazy on the subject of guns? .

I agree about large capacity clips,they really have no place in the hunting or sport shooting world,and shouldn't be sold legally on the open market,but thugs and slugs will still find them on the black market. Squeeky-changes-suck 10 months ago .

Because liberals whine when it's to their benefit and they mis-report events in the snews by emphasizing the bad. Fact is, guns regularly are used to prevent crimes, but those aren't reported, either. The other half of the answer is that it's our fault for watching TV news which shows the bad and dramatic but not the good.

Meanwhile, driving is rarely "news" because everyone does it and those unfortunate events happen all the time and we all know they happen all the time. Yes, fact is, more people die on American highways each year than died in the entire Vietnam War. And that's every year.

One guy shot by a crazy person is a tragedy; 50,000 highway deaths is a statistic. A third reason is that people are more easily convinced they can give up guns than that they can give up their car. Call for limitations on car use and people will start thinking you'll be the next crazy guy shooting someone.

Thanks for your reply Squeeky-changes-suck 10 months ago .

They tried banning booze back during Prohibition, but that didn't pan out so well. I think that the reason people don't call for the banning of cars, is that cars are very seldom used as implements of murder. Even what we call "vehicular homicide" is rarely if ever a DELIBERATE attempt on the life of the one who was killed.

Although virtually ANY object can be used as a deadly weapon, there is no implement more widely available and effective for committing deliberate mass carnage than guns. Would the Virginia Tech gunman have been able to murder 30 people (not including the two he had killed hours earlier) within minutes with a baseball bat, crossbow, or even a SWORD for that matter? No way.

The only ways by which he could have carried out anything remotely on that scale would have been a suicide bombing or if he had shown up tossing sticks of dynamite. People in the U.S. At least won't be resorting to those methods anytime soon, even if guns disappeared, and they are not going to disappear. So I'm guessing that the reason why people talk about gun control or banning guns has to do with the recognition of the uniquely efficient nature of guns as implements by which people carry out mass devastation.

The scale of the devastation really isn't possible via the use of any other readily available implement. If someone wants to kill a lot of people, and there is no gun available to them, they simply cannot do it. They might use another implement, and succeed in killing a few people as opposed to a dozen or more.

If you were face-to-face with someone who was intent on taking your life, what would you rather see in their hand: a bat or knife... or a Glock 25? Or maybe we should ALL carry guns, and bring back the good ol' days of the Wild West. Boy have we come a long way, eh?.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.