Criminals break the law, therefore, they will not follow gun laws.
Click to vote
4%4 Votes
Strongly Disagree
9%9 Votes
Disagree
7%7 Votes
Undecided
36%37 Votes
Agree
44%45 Votes
Strongly Agree
4%4 Votes
Strongly Disagree
9%9 Votes
Disagree
7%7 Votes
Undecided
36%37 Votes
Agree
44%45 Votes
Strongly Agree
This graph isn't ready yet
We haven't received enough votes with gender data to show this graph yet.
We will show the graph as soon as we have enough votes!
Results by Country
Results by Voter Type
Community votes are collected from you and other visitors to Ask500People. Independent votes are collected from visitors to hundreds of other websites around the world.
Sign Up or Login
Sorry, this data is only available to users with an account.
What is interesting is this is the big flaw in the anti-gun argument. How can any reasonable person expect a "criminal" to follow any gun law when by the very nature of the term criminal, they break the law!
If you don't like guns, fine. But restricting gun ownership has historically and will forever only hurt people that obey the law.
If it's such a no-brainer then there would not be anti-gun laws.
We're not going to get rid of ALL guns which implies that criminals will have them no matter what (their nature as criminals means they will disregard the laws relating to guns) If guns are illegal then ONLY criminals will have them--a bad thing.
Oh how naive you are. If you eliminate the private ownership of firearms, only the bad guys will have guns. Do you really think the crooks care if it is illegal or not to have a gun. Get real spencercor.
Really, can you cite an example of this? I believe Washington DC has forbidden private ownership of guns, yet there are gun crimes everywhere in that city. I would just love to live in a city where my constitutional rights have been abolished and I am unable to protect myself against someone armed with a gun and in my house.
United States
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 4 years ago by deleted user ReplyWhat is interesting is this is the big flaw in the anti-gun argument. How can any reasonable person expect a "criminal" to follow any gun law when by the very nature of the term criminal, they break the law!
If you don't like guns, fine. But restricting gun ownership has historically and will forever only hurt people that obey the law.
'Nuf said.
Pretty much
Couldn't have said it better
Isn't this a no brainer? yah! duh!
If it's such a no-brainer then there would not be anti-gun laws.
We're not going to get rid of ALL guns which implies that criminals will have them no matter what (their nature as criminals means they will disregard the laws relating to guns) If guns are illegal then ONLY criminals will have them--a bad thing.
Gun laws shouldn't be aimed at preventing criminals from USING guns, but rather at preventing them from GETTING guns.
If you eliminate the private ownership of guns, the supply for crooks will dry up.
So you want to punish law abiding citizens for what a black market would give criminals?
This just does not make sense.
You want to:
1) throw out our constitutional rights; and
2) punish law abiding people
For what again?
Oh how naive you are. If you eliminate the private ownership of firearms, only the bad guys will have guns. Do you really think the crooks care if it is illegal or not to have a gun. Get real spencercor.
Really, can you cite an example of this? I believe Washington DC has forbidden private ownership of guns, yet there are gun crimes everywhere in that city. I would just love to live in a city where my constitutional rights have been abolished and I am unable to protect myself against someone armed with a gun and in my house.
There is nothing wrong with law abiding citizens owning guns. Criminals do not respect or care about gun laws.