Quote Originally Posted by steveaki13 View Post
Hey I admit I may be wrong, but IMO guns and the people who use them more often and not cause trouble.

Less guns would generally mean less deaths by guns. That in my view would be a better way to look towards rather than training 9 years olds to use them.
Less stairs would mean fewer deaths by stairs. Banning cars would mean fewer deaths by vehicle accidents.

In the end, removing guns from law abiding citizens has shown in the majority of cases to increase violent crime, including murder. Look at any large city for proof of that. On the flip side, areas that adopt concealed carry permits for law abiding owners lowers violent crime rates almost immediately.

So the reality is more legally owned guns reduces deaths by guns.




Having dug into this subject a number of times over the years, I've found that often many different places use the "less death caused by guns" statement, which may be true. Many of them also see an increased murder rate, suicide rates change very little, etc, etc.

If cigarettes were outlawed and it was strictly enforced, no doubt deaths caused by smoking would decline. But if all those former smokers drank themselves to death, would it have accomplished anything?