If everyone was armed, there would be more shootings, both purposeful and accidental, not a political statement, just simple math. Some crimes might drop. It remains to be seen if its worth it for most people to tolerate that change
The lethality of playground fights would skyrocket.
He is not excluding felons. He is excluding people who are in jail whether they are felons or not.
This is a pretty silly hypo, I don’t see what it adds to the debate but I suspect the Op is trying to make some sort of point that probably requires straw manning the gun rights position while at the same imagining a nonsensical scenario.
There is no possible reading of the constitution that would prohibit restricting guns from felons. None.
The number of felons and adjudicated insane are low but their portion of gun murders is very high.
We have 50 states in this country and over the last 100 years we have had gun control regimes that go from virtually no regulation at all to a total ban on firearms and we haven’t seen the sort of extremes that you or your friend are concerned about.
The swings are fairly mild.
What portion of gun murders belong to the adjudicated insane?
Its not like there isn’t a history of jurisdictions with high gun ownership and virtually no gun control. We didn’t see gun violence that is two or three times as high.
We might see three times the accident rate if everyone was forced to own a gun and keep it in their home (I doubt it but we might)
Even if we are forcing criminals to own guns then I don’t think we will see three times the homicide rate (or three times the suicide rate) that borders on the hysterical.
Much easier to hotwire a car than get into a shootout over it. Much easier to burglarize an empty home than rob one that is filled with armed people. Crimnals may value life less than others but they still don’t want to die over a Honda Accord.
These places are armed BECAUSE they are commonly robbed. Why do you think these places bother being armed, just for the fuck of it? It deters robberies by increasing the risk presented to the criminals.
Is it really that much of a reach to conclude that criminals would rather rob unarmed folks than armed folks? is it really that much of a reach to conclude that criminals would rather burglarize a home when no one is home rather than rob a home when armed people are present?
So you think that in an armed society armed robberies would all turn into murders?
We have jurisdictions that that have high gun ownership rates and the criminals do not go around killing people to loot the corpses.
Not sure, but I am going to guess that the number starts to get high if we force them to own a gun
I was referring to your statement of fact:
Where did this come from, how big a part do the “adjudicated insane” play in that equation, and would it make a difference if we took out the words “adjudicated insane” and substituted the words “left-handed albinos”?
I’ll bet prison rapes would go way down if we armed all prisoners.
I did not intend a “straw man” argument. I have actually heard (from real people) an argument that more guns in the hands of every member of the public would make for a better, safer society. Full stop.
Even some here seem to feel that violent crime would markedly decrease, and any increase in accidents, or suicides would be worth it.
In terms of comparisons of jursidictions with differing rules about guns (and corresponding gun homicides), the data isnot as clear-cut as some here would have us believe.
What is your point?
I was using felons and adjudicated insane as shorthand for prohibited persons (not because its shorter but because people keep asking who is a prohibited person.
This is not adjudicated insane so maybe its a bad cite but…
mental illness has a lot to do with murder rates.
Felons commit ~40% of murders and it is likely that they commit a higher percentage of gun murders.
Next time why don’t you ask them if they also mean to arm felons, little children and the mentally ill. I bet their"full stop" actually includes a lot of exceptions.
I don’t think we would see much of an increase in suicides but accidents would probably increase (I don’t know if the population of people who don’t own guns but would be FORCED to own guns would be more likely or less likely to have an accident but at least some of them will have accidents).
Why would you distinguish between gun violence and violence generally. The correlation that people point to disappears when you replace gun murders with murder (by any means).
Its like saying there are more gun suicides in America than in Korea so guns must be the cause of all those additional gun suicides.