# How could gun control reduce gun violence in the United States? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [December 4, 2015, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449 "2015-12-04T21:04:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Bullitt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bullitt/32/5725_2.png) [@Bullitt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bullitt)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2015, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/41 "2015-12-05T19:36:33Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > The argument made by the OP’s friend doesn’t stand up to any sort of scrutiny. He says that stricter laws wouldn’t do anything… so why not have the stricter laws? If half the country thinks a law will do absolutely nothing, and the other half thinks it’ll have a beneficial effect, then we should pass that law. Maybe the side that says it’ll do nothing should ask for something else in compromise, but what’s the harm? > > Back in the land of reality, gun manufacturers are still in business, despite how many guns we already have. Apparently there’s some non-negligible fraction of the population for whom the existing supply is not adequate. If new guns were not available, it’d be at the least harder for those people to get a gun, and at least some of them who would own a gun would end up not owning a gun. And at least some of those people who would find themselves not getting a gun would be criminals. > Why? If someone’s charging me with a baseball bat, and I have a bat too, I have at least some chance of blocking. How the heck am I going to defend myself with a gun? All I can do with the gun is shoot the guy, but that’s not going to stop him from whacking me over the head. With a bat, yes, at least _ **some chance of** _ blocking. With a gun, and with calm control and good aim (challenges, admittedly, when the adrenaline is pumping furiously), the guy doesn’t even reach me. What I have a healthy fear of are the many gun-toting Toms, Dicks, and Harriets who think they’re ready to handle such a situation. I hope I don’t live near to, and down range from, them. Because when they miss, the walls of my house might not stop their bullets. ---
**Author:** ![Bullitt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bullitt/32/5725_2.png) [@Bullitt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bullitt)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2015, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/42 "2015-12-05T19:38:41Z")
> [@Scumpup](#): > > Did you hold the gun in both hands, aim for his COM… A quick double-tap to COM, then one just above the eyes. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2015, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/43 "2015-12-05T21:08:58Z")
> [@China\_Guy](#): > > I think a good first step is to make gun owners liable. I grew up in the country around guns. The cornerstone that just about every gun owner agrees with is that “you are responsible for your piece”, “always assume the gun is loaded”, “never shoot at anything if you don’t know what is behind it”, etc. > > The broad strokes (and let’s not nit pick away please) are: > > 1. firearm liability insurance is mandatory. It’s akin to private automobile insurance. > 2. firearms are registered to an owner, who is then responsible for that piece until there is a clear transfer of ownership. In other words, you loan it to your cousin and it’s used illegally by your cousin (or your cousin’s “friend”), then you have criminal and/or civil liablity. If you transfer registration then of course the new owner is the one that is liable. Of course there will be exceptions like some perp threatens your family unless you hand over the glock, and then that perp goes and shoots up the mall before you report it to the police or some such scenario. > 3. No one tells you how to secure your piece in your home. However, you are criminally and/or civilly liable if there is a gun accident in your home. Or if there is a young child tragedy. Or if your piece is just lying next to the bedroom and it’s stolen, you have some kind of liability as you didn’t properly prevent it from being stolen. Again, not here to dictate what is safe or how to store it in your home, but no free pass if tragedy happens. I think that’s a fair deal. You’re confident the piece is “secured” (however you define it) and if it’s not then it’s on you. > > IMHO the above is a pretty American solution. You own a piece, you are responsible. Full stop. I agree. We don’t ban guns. We force gun owners to take their ownership seriously, and that means making them criminally liable for accidents and crimes that are the result of their negligence. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2015, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/44 "2015-12-05T21:16:11Z")
> [@The\_Hamster\_King](#): > > I agree. We don’t ban guns. We force gun owners to take their ownership seriously, and that means making them criminally liable for accidents and crimes that are the result of their negligence. There is a significant difference between liability for negligence, which we already have, and the strict almost overreaching liability that \*\*China Guy \*\*proposes. I’m not suggesting either is a bad idea. Merely that tossing the term “negligence” around negligently is, well, negligent. In law it has a specific meaning that doesn’t line up with what many people think. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2015, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/45 "2015-12-05T22:12:16Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Removing enough guns will dry up the supply for criminals, both the US and across the western hemisphere; the US is the armory for the criminals of the Americas. they make AK-47’s with hand tools in Pakistan. What do you think a nation full of people with a machine shop in the basement and 3D printers could do? Take 300 million guns away and 500 million will pop up. the difference is that the person making them underground isn’t going to stamp a traceable number on any of the parts. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2015, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/46 "2015-12-05T22:15:13Z")
> [@Bullitt](#): > > Interesting. It _ **seems** _ true, IMO, but it’d be good to get the facts. The graph was completely un-sourced, no cites, so I’m exceedingly suspicious. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2015, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/47 "2015-12-05T22:22:55Z")
> [@The\_Hamster\_King](#): > > I agree. We don’t ban guns. We force gun owners to take their ownership seriously, and that means making them criminally liable for accidents and crimes that are the result of their negligence. They’re already liable for this and prosecuted accordingly. While you can make a separate point about non-violent deaths being more preventable the thread is about violent use of a gun. ---
**Author:** ![China\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/779978/32.png) [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2015, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/48 "2015-12-05T22:42:50Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > They’re already liable for this and prosecuted accordingly. While you can make a separate point about non-violent deaths being more preventable the thread is about violent use of a gun. Magiver, maybe I have a misperception, but off the top of my head, Gun Show loophole guns do not have a liable owner (in most if not all cases), ditto with buying off the internet. You can take the case of Nancy Lanza, who’s estate certainly can’t even begin to cover the costs of what her son Adam perpetrated. From [NPR](http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/01/31/170700177/should-gun-owners-have-to-buy-liability-insurance): instead of taxing guns, we should tax gun violence. Basically, this is the same as saying that we should make gun owners liable for any damage their guns do. Not only would this discourage some people from buying guns, it would lead those who do keep guns to be more careful with how they’re stored. Indeed, greater care would surely have kept Adam Lanza out of his mother’s cache. The problem, though, is that Nancy Lanza is neither with us to pay the damages her gun caused, nor could she afford to pay for the enormous damage her gun wrought in Newtown. Here’s another [http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2012/11/how\_liable\_is\_the\_owner\_of\_a\_s.html:](http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2012/11/how_liable_is_the_owner_of_a_s.html:) If the gun is used to intentionally commit a crime, to kill or injure someone, the court will not impose civil liability on the gun owner for the acts of a third person. Again, under the proximate cause doctrine, the actions of the thief would supersede the negligence of the gun owner, cutting off his liability, LeCesne said. LSLGuy: “In law it has a specific meaning that doesn’t line up with what many people think.” What does a legal definition of “negligence” mean? Is culpable a better word to use? If one’s weapon is not sufficiently secured, and ends up being used in a violent crime, then IMHO the owner is culpable. The owner didn’t pull the trigger, but enabled in some part because the weapon was not sufficiently secured. That’s part and parcel with the government not defining what “secured” means, since the onus is on the gun owner. And are there any gun owners on this board that have a issue with “all gun owners are responsible for securing their weapon?” I could be wrong, but that was the basic tenet I grew up with. ---
**Author:** ![China\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/779978/32.png) [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2015, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/49 "2015-12-05T22:50:51Z")
Outside the edit window. [The Times-Picuyune (New Orleans and I have no idea if they are liberal, conservative or have a particular axe to grind on this issue one way or another)](http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2012/11/how_liable_is_the_owner_of_a_s.html) also had this tidbit: The courts, he said, generally view the shooting another person as unforeseeable act for a lawful gun owner who simply forgot to secure their weapon. “It’s unfair and unjust to hold that person responsible,” LeCesne said. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2015, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/50 "2015-12-05T22:58:32Z")
> [@Scumpup](#): > > You think? [This source](http://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/) indicates that quite a lot of people are killed with weapons other than guns. Knives and blunt objects are used more often than long guns which are the easiest type of gun to obtain. 😕 that says that, by far, handguns are used the most to kill people. firearms of all types kill about 4 times the amount that knives and blunt objects do. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2015, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/51 "2015-12-05T23:12:51Z")
> [@Bullitt](#): > > The data might not support your assertion. > > [people attacked with knives - Google Search](https://www.google.com/search?q=people+attacked+with+knives&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari#hl=en-us&q=people+attacked+with+knives+united+states) > > [Knives Killed Five Times As Many People As Rifles Last Year](http://thefederalist.com/2014/11/11/knives-kill-more-people-each-year-than-rifles-time-for-knife-control/) I think you know, and **Scumpup** too, that what I said was hyperbole. In case there’s any room for doubt here I’m not suggesting that knives and blunt instruments are _never_ used as murder weapons. But I would suggest that in a society where guns are easy to get hold of, they will be used in far, far more homicides than knives and blunt instruments. Sure enough, your link bears that out. Of the 12,000 or so murders it looks like 8,000 were by firearms of some type. In the UK for 2012 there were about 550 murders and only 39 were by firearms. No that isn’t typo. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2015, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/52 "2015-12-05T23:39:35Z")
From [FastStats - Injuries](http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm) guns cause about as many deaths as cars, but not as many as poison. ---
**Author:** ![China\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/779978/32.png) [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2015, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/53 "2015-12-06T01:59:46Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > From [FastStats - Injuries](http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm) guns cause about as many deaths as cars, but not as many as poison. I would expect poison is generally not with murderous intent but largely accidental. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2015, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/54 "2015-12-06T03:00:34Z")
Seconded on basement workshops. Formerly you had to be a skilled machinist to make parts for a quality firearm (anything better than a cobbled-together zip gun). Today you can buy a CNC milling machine that automates most of the production process, and 3D printing will make it even easier. Producing physical objects may soon be as unblockable as producing words. ---
**Author:** ![Habeed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a587f6/32.png) [@Habeed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Habeed)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2015, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/55 "2015-12-06T03:41:45Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > The argument made by the OP’s friend doesn’t stand up to any sort of scrutiny. He says that stricter laws wouldn’t do anything… so why not have the stricter laws? If half the country thinks a law will do absolutely nothing, and the other half thinks it’ll have a beneficial effect, then we should pass that law. Maybe the side that says it’ll do nothing should ask for something else in compromise, but what’s the harm? My friend likes playing with guns. He has some kind of blinged out to heck AR, a blinged out to heck Sig-sauer pistol, and probably other weapons I don’t know about. He knows that tougher laws would make it far more difficult to obtain these premium, “military grade” firearms, as they did during the last round of bans. (assault weapon ban made it moderately more difficult to get ARs without playing the “does it have a flash hider” game, and higher end pistols like a Sig, there are often various bits of proposed legislation that might ban em). He doesn’t want his law abiding hobby to be inconvenienced out of a misguided attempt to reduce gun violence. He doesn’t say the laws wouldn’t do anything - they would make it harder for law abiding citizens to obtain new, higher end weapons. He just doesn’t think it would make any difference in how many people are shot. If you were a hardcore gamer, and they decided to pass laws that made the higher end consoles like the PS4 and Xbox One illegal, unless they are purposefully made to suck : “no more than 4 gigs of ram, or a gpu with 500 shader units, or it’s too addictive for any gamer to handle”. Sure, someone could use a PC (just like someone could make their own AR and full capacity magazines), but that’s inconvenient. ---
**Author:** ![Projammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/projammer/32/559_2.png) [@Projammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Projammer)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2015, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/56 "2015-12-06T04:11:11Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Highly implausible. It’s much more likely that people would rant and rave - and then hand over the guns. And if they really tried to play Rambo they’d be crushed like bugs; in the real world the idea of guys with rifles fighting off a modern military just doesn’t work. Presuming you’re going to repeal the Posse Comitatus act along with the second amendment, you will still have to create military units who are willing to go against American citizens on American soil. I don’t expect you’re going to have a lines of volunteers for that duty. A few thousands at best and they will be engaged in a serious war of attrition. Better to dry up the supplies of ammunition. Sure, there are people with tens of thousands of rounds stashed, but those are the outliers on the bell curve of gun owners. I imagine your typical gang-bangers and 7-11 knock off thugs have a few hundred rounds at most and they won’t last nearly the years projected for any sort of firearm reduction plan. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2015, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/57 "2015-12-06T05:41:49Z")
> [@Projammer](#): > > Presuming you’re going to repeal the Posse Comitatus act along with the second amendment, you will still have to create military units who are willing to go against American citizens on American soil. I don’t expect you’re going to have a lines of volunteers for that duty. A few thousands at best and they will be engaged in a serious war of attrition. > > Better to dry up the supplies of ammunition. Sure, there are people with tens of thousands of rounds stashed, but those are the outliers on the bell curve of gun owners. I imagine your typical gang-bangers and 7-11 knock off thugs have a few hundred rounds at most and they won’t last nearly the years projected for any sort of firearm reduction plan. Your typical gang-banger might have trouble but anything as rudimentary as guns/amunition can be made at home. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2015, 5:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/58 "2015-12-06T05:52:55Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > If guns are largely forbidden that makes it obvious that someone carrying a gun is likely a threat, and they are more likely to be caught and stopped. Something I saw brought up during the recent terrorist attacks in Europe; that was one of the response of Europeans to Americans insisting they need guns. Well they caught them red handed all right. I don’t know if they ran out of ammunition or were just exhausted from squeezing the trigger but they did stop them. ---
**Author:** ![Projammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/projammer/32/559_2.png) [@Projammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Projammer)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2015, 7:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/59 "2015-12-06T07:25:39Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Your typical gang-banger might have trouble but anything as rudimentary as guns/amunition can be made at home. Sure I can go to my bench and crank out a thousand rounds of ammunition in an afternoon. With components I have to buy at a store. I can cast slugs as long as I have a source of lead; not too great a challenge. But while I can probably mix up my own mostly functional black powder, primers are right outta there. The primer is the part that ignites the gunpowder that makes the actual bullet go forward. The primer compound is incredibly unstable during the production process and would probably take someone out of the manufacturing business in a very short amount of time. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2015, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449/60 "2015-12-06T07:35:18Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > From [FastStats - Injuries](http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm) guns cause about as many deaths as cars, but not as many as poison. That’s a large document, can you point to the relevant section? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-could-gun-control-reduce-gun-violence-in-the-united-states/739449.md?page=4)