Question:
Agree or disagree, Banning guns will stop mass shootings?
Bobby T
2017-11-14 01:10:57 UTC
Agree or disagree, Banning guns will stop mass shootings?
261 answers:
David
2017-11-16 01:38:40 UTC
Banning guns would do nothing. Guns aren't just going to disappear if you ban them.



There are more guns in the America than there are people. That's never gonna change either.



People need to be aware of guns purposes and taught how it's a part of our nation's culture and heritage.
Musa
2017-11-17 18:31:30 UTC
In the USA no. They can get guns from the street stolen and inside the black market. They do it all the time here in the Washington D.C. area.
?
2017-11-15 23:17:06 UTC
Yes, look at Australia.
anonymous
2017-11-15 21:37:23 UTC
Stop, no. Greatly decrease,..yes.
?
2017-11-15 15:26:50 UTC
Generally, yes, as it cannot be argued all criminals have the same determination to obtain a given weapon. So for those who have plenty of it, the black market will always exist.
tiescore
2017-11-15 14:23:10 UTC
A liberal the other day on here was saying I have to give the government all my earnings to support because he's to lazy to be an adult and take care of him. If I didn't I deserved to be guillotined... so I'm buying more guns, thank you very much.
speany
2017-11-15 13:37:13 UTC
yes get rid of them all and replace them with nerf guns ( I am not sponserd by nerf) (yet)
anonymous
2017-11-15 06:37:57 UTC
Of course banning guns will stop shootings.

How could it NOT stop them? Lol

Arrest ppl who don't surrender their guns, and suddenly no guns exist any longer.
mrcoog
2017-11-14 21:26:42 UTC
The answer lies in true logic.
humpty
2017-11-14 17:55:20 UTC
When will the gun mastubators ever admit that the liberals are not trying to ban guns? They are trying to limit access to military grade ordinance, which is a huge difference. Banning convertible weapons would certainly reduce the number of mass shootings and greatly reduce the number of victims, and that is something anybody who is not a fetishist regards as a good thing. This accused liberal owns three guns himself, but what good do they do for home protection if some maniac can fire a hundred rounds a minute right through the wall I am hiding behind? The thing that I most want to see is a simple safety course required for purchase to educate the morons who shoot themselves or others because they don't know what they are doing. The ER I worked in saw plenty of fools who shot themselves by sticking their pistol on their waistbands, for instance. A safety course (even one taught by the NRA) would prevent this kind of injury in most cases. We do not want to ban guns as much as make them saferf for the general public, The First Amendment guaranteed our right to life, you know.
BOOM
2017-11-14 01:37:17 UTC
Disagree. Banning ASSAULT RIFLES and preventing mentally unstable people from owning weapons will stop mass shootings.
Joseph
2017-11-17 18:19:56 UTC
Criminals by DEFINITION do not obey laws. Banning hard drugs like heroin and cocaine has done NOTHING to stop their illegal use. No, a gun ban will do nothing to stop shootings.
?
2017-11-17 08:56:07 UTC
Disagree the only people disadvantaged by a gun ban would be law abiding citizens.
Warren T
2017-11-16 13:01:04 UTC
NO, Because than anyone wanting to carry out a mass shooting wouldn't have to worry about getting killed
?
2017-11-16 04:24:11 UTC
Nope no matter what you do you can’t stop crazies
?
2017-11-16 01:16:10 UTC
You think banning guns will stop mass shootings? LMAO!



How is that phony "war on drugs" going? How was "Prohibition"? How were those "no sodomy" laws? How were those bans on dancing and cussing?



You fascist-Democrats are insane. Are antigun scum ready to DIE trying to take American's guns? Because most Americans are ready to die to keep ANY and ALL types of their guns.
anonymous
2017-11-15 23:59:55 UTC
Disagree. People will still find a way to get weapons.
Octavio
2017-11-15 21:59:08 UTC
No it wont, it's just delays or makes it harder for those few disturbed or terrorists to access guns. Same with drugs, there's always a way which is unfortunate.
?
2017-11-15 18:52:55 UTC
of course not

if you want to stop mass shootings, ban people, they pull the trigger, a gun is merely a combination of some metal and wood, it has no life, no function on its own, it takes a finger to pull the mechanism to fire
?
2017-11-15 18:35:20 UTC
Disagree
The First Dragon
2017-11-15 07:18:28 UTC
Disagree.

It hasn't worked in Mexico, has it? Guns are banned there except for police and military.
?
2017-11-15 06:17:00 UTC
Disagree. Criminals would only exploit banning guns, while the general public would be left defenseless.
Stalfoz
2017-11-15 04:21:36 UTC
A lot of the people here are hypocrites. they only care about american lives, assault weapons killed and still kill people in villages and small towns in the middle east. also in Vietnam we kill and even burned a ton of people. "Mass shootings" are nothing compared to what happens to innocent people overseas. Also banning weapons will allow corruption because now we wont be able to overthrow the government if they decide to break their own laws.
?
2017-11-15 04:06:02 UTC
I agree with the 'ban assault weapons' answers. Keep guns for self defense though. Just ban semiautomatic rifles.
Vinegar Taster
2017-11-15 02:20:46 UTC
Ban criminals ...
anonymous
2017-11-14 21:05:10 UTC
Yes
?
2017-11-14 20:01:43 UTC
If America decided to invade Canada, they would be defeated. Why? Certainly not because of Canada's little military. And certainly not because of Canada's police, either. They would fail to conquer Canada because of Canada's army of rednecks with hunting rifles. Allowing your citizens to have guns makes your country stronger. Also, philosophy does not agree with the notion of banning guns, because it is in the grey; should we ban knives and cars next?



On a practical level, banning guns would save lives. But, on a practical level as well, banning cars would save lives. The question is whether or not cars--and guns--are worth the negative consequences that inevitably arise as a consequence of their existence, or not.
anonymous
2017-11-14 17:10:11 UTC
Not really. But it's a major first step towards controlling the problem.
daniel g
2017-11-14 16:32:03 UTC
Are you serious. Banning guns means only criminals that don't abide by lawswill have them.

An who is going to protect you that 30 seconds you need it most, carry a cop? a cell phone will work if the bad guy wants to wait around for first responders.

Guns outlawed in Australia, and look at the stats, violent crimes including gun homicides up by 600% the first month.

You only hear of the homicides,mass shootings and attacks with guns, The 78 YO man that shot one home intruder to death and injured another never even made local headline news, the woman that shot dead a stranger entering their home and threatening the life of mother and daughter, nobody ever caught wind of that one.

Even the sheriff from the recent Texas shooting said it could have been worse had it not been for two armed citizens shooting back. the shooter dropped his rifle and ran and caught by the citizens. Half of news media doesn't even mention that part.

No,now more than ever,people need to get gun smart, gun safe, and learn how to protect themselves lest they become victims.

There are over 300 million legal guns in the US and over 200 million responsible people legally have them.

You can be very certain if guns were a problem, you would know it.

Flat disagree.

> even funny to me with this very site, with questions depicting the positive aspects of self defense with guns seem to vanish.
anonymous
2017-11-14 05:22:10 UTC
Well first of all if every gun was banned and destroyed in America, there obviously wouldn't be shootings unless guns were imported. That's obvious. If no guns exist there are no shootings.

But I'm not saying let's ban all guns. I disagree with that as I support gun rights. Though it's also obvious we need better background checks and restrictions on certain types of guns (like the same gun that caused the Las Vegas, Orlando, and Texas shootings for example)
anonymous
2017-11-14 03:17:35 UTC
disagree.............if sick minded individuals want to commit a mass shooting they will find a way to obtain a suitable weapon to do so,or they may already own such a weapon...........banning guns does not mean there will be no weapons available for illegal use....especially with all the guns sold already in the USA
Blake
2017-11-18 07:30:27 UTC
Disagree. MORE guns in the hands of responsible gun owners would help. If 1 person walked into a room of 100 people who were all armed and tried to open fire, they wouldn't get very far. If you ban guns, criminals will still be able to get them.
?
2017-11-17 22:27:07 UTC
Boi, just fricking ban it,god damn it. Y'all wildin'
Ronald 7
2017-11-17 19:53:35 UTC
Disagree

They would end up in the hands of the underground
anonymous
2017-11-17 16:46:37 UTC
Yes, and sooner than you think, those mass shootings will be replace with even more horrible things, such as total economic tyranny, the loss of our freedom of speech (First Amendment) and the fact that old fashioned robberies, brutal assaults and physical victimization like we haven't had in decades will start to happen again! Rapes, murders, stabbings, people being hit by cars deliberately, you will even miss the guns.
kevin
2017-11-17 05:09:13 UTC
Somewhat
anonymous
2017-11-16 20:28:36 UTC
Yes.



You don't want a worldwide reputation for being warmongers now would you ?.
anonymous
2017-11-16 05:20:56 UTC
Let me guess: you're another one of those tards who thinks democrats wants to ban guns, huh?



No we don't. We want STRICTER GUN REGULATIONS. The limtards of this forum confuse banning guns with stricter gun regulations
Gealt
2017-11-16 00:44:32 UTC
Yes
anonymous
2017-11-15 21:40:07 UTC
It won't happen
?
2017-11-15 21:13:16 UTC
NO, then the GOVERNMENT will do it
?
2017-11-15 17:21:20 UTC
I agree
Tad Dubious
2017-11-15 15:55:12 UTC
Disagree, Blue. A person can ALWAYS get a gun. Heck, they can now MAKE one with a 3-D printer.
Harry
2017-11-15 10:06:51 UTC
disagree
anonymous
2017-11-15 07:45:38 UTC
Bombs are stills there
?
2017-11-15 07:22:05 UTC
Yes. Have you seen the gun laws in Japan? They are much more strict over there and there were way less shootings in Japan than in the US. Gun crime was in double figures last year in Japan, but it was in the thousands in the US. I live in UK, and in my lifetime I have never seen a mass shooting, because guns are illegal.
CJ
2017-11-15 04:24:20 UTC
Disagree it will only add to the problem. with making it hard to get more will do what ever to get them.
?
2017-11-15 01:11:41 UTC
Are you crazy? OF COURSE NOT! Drugs are illegal yet they're everywhere!
anonymous
2017-11-14 23:07:22 UTC
I suppose some cons might get into martial arts, but that requires major discipline and work. You don't become Jackie Chan in a couple weeks.
anonymous
2017-11-14 01:19:39 UTC
Let's see what happens when you take guns out of the equation:



"Nine Hurt in Minnesota Mall Knife Attack, Suspect Killed"

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/nine-people-taken-hospital-after-minnesota-mall-stabbings-n650081



None dead, other than the suspect.



That is the result when you takes guns out of the hands of the insane.
Serene
2017-11-18 05:06:27 UTC
Won’t stop mass shooting but it will slowly decrease
bittersnoepje
2017-11-17 20:50:48 UTC
Disagree.



Guns are already smuggled into many countries. Banning guns would just increase that market and having a secret and non regulated market for guns would be just as if not more dangerous.





Mandatory Gun/safety education and a better screening process for those who are legally purchasing guns is a much better solution.
U Wish
2017-11-17 12:16:56 UTC
Strongly disagree.
Child_of_the_One_True_King
2017-11-16 21:31:29 UTC
Disagree! Banning criminals from owning guns will stop mass shootings!
Captain Tomak
2017-11-16 16:54:39 UTC
No...Soros and his paid goons will still shoot US up.
GXLDG▲NG
2017-11-16 06:41:45 UTC
disagree with every fiber of my being.. the government plans these mass shootings.. they just want to ban guns so that we don't have a way to protect ourselves from them.
Transpilot
2017-11-16 03:05:08 UTC
HOW does one shoot and kill anyone if he (she?) does NOT have a gun?🙄 There is just NO reasoning with conservative gun enthusiasts. I swear, a group with automatic weapons could wipe out a town of 3,000 and right-wing gun folk would want to change nothing about the complete availability of all guns. And a million thumbs for my comment won't change it's COMMON SENSE and logic. *Sigh*, please wake up and smell the coffee for everyone's good.
Kayleigh
2017-11-16 02:44:08 UTC
I believe that banning guns would not stop mass shootings. People already sell weapons illegally, and while it may temporarily decrease mass shootings the number of shootings would probably eventually level out at slightly below current numbers of mass shootings. I feel that the only way to prevent mass shootings are to discover the causes and reasons behind them and address those issues before a school shooting happens. Guns do not kill people on their own, the people with guns who intend to inflict harm on other human beings kill people.
Jack
2017-11-15 20:47:20 UTC
Agree
colleen
2017-11-15 20:19:20 UTC
Disagree, the gun is not the problem, the operator is. Even if guns get banned then they'll just make home-made weapons. they'll find a loop hole.
anonymous
2017-11-15 14:48:08 UTC
agree
anonymous
2017-11-15 13:10:56 UTC
It might stop mass shootings but it won't stop mass killings. If someone wants to kill, they will kill, has nothing to do with a gun. Remember Cain and Able, he used a rock, so ban rocks.
?
2017-11-15 05:07:01 UTC
Have you ever heard of a mass shooting with a legal gun? The people doing this sh!t aren't afraid to break a law or two.
?
2017-11-15 04:58:36 UTC
police dont care sometimes or there is no police everwhere ,so gun is must
McNeef
2017-11-15 04:14:13 UTC
Strongly disagree. Banning alcohol during the Prohibition didn't stop drinking. Banning drugs just drove them underground. You cannot prevent murderers from obtaining the weapons to do their dirty deeds. The best you can hope to do is to arm yourself in self-defense and be prepared to shoot back. And when the bad guys gang up on you, you need to be able to shoot back a lot, so AR15s and high-capacity magazines have a legitimate self-defense use.
?
2017-11-15 03:50:01 UTC
Nope.





There's literally no way to do that.
ANUJ
2017-11-14 19:21:53 UTC
I don't think so...one should change the mentality of people
anonymous
2017-11-14 14:51:42 UTC
cant ban guns people hunt and need something to protect themselves with the government needs to put a chip in it that shuts of a gun if your about to do a mass shooting
phillipk_1959
2017-11-14 13:37:24 UTC
Disagree, I don't believe in the Easter Bunny either.
anonymous
2017-11-14 01:12:10 UTC
That's like asking, "agree or disagree, banning nukes from North Korea will stop a nuclear holocaust?"
anonymous
2017-11-18 09:17:26 UTC
No... it didn't work in here.
?
2017-11-18 05:09:24 UTC
Disagree. Do you honestly think criminals are going to follow gun control. If you do you are a special kind of stupid.
Mr. P
2017-11-17 11:06:18 UTC
Disagree. Only law abiding citizens will comply -leaving criminals to still use guns against them.
Parker
2017-11-16 15:23:36 UTC
Its working for the rest of the world isn't it?
?
2017-11-16 05:00:22 UTC
Rather use of guns should be restricted or limited.
danny
2017-11-15 21:39:02 UTC
Well it won’t stop , it will decrease , all I know is it’s not going to have a negative effect
Otto
2017-11-15 19:35:55 UTC
I agree .
?
2017-11-15 16:55:24 UTC
1000% DISAGREE!!!!
anonymous
2017-11-15 16:25:32 UTC
Lowest crime rate at japan with no guns allow. Hmm I think not banning gun will definitetely help compare to japan.
anonymous
2017-11-15 15:40:20 UTC
It will decrease it
?
2017-11-15 09:01:34 UTC
Guns aren't actually the problem .. although why a member of the public needs to own an "assault weapon" is beyond me, as it is quite obviously an "attack" weapon and not a "defence" weapon.

The problem is the apparent lack of any kind of control over WHO can have a gun.

A gun is quite safe in the hands of the majority of people .. but it only takes one crazy person with one to have a mass shooting !
lucy
2017-11-15 08:38:58 UTC
Disagree! Banning guns will reduce the amount of mass shootings but it definitely won’t stop them.
Someone1976
2017-11-15 06:55:40 UTC
Disagree, bad people would still find a way to get their hands on weapons. Just like prohibition. Even if you ban it people will find a way to get it illegally.
Geri42
2017-11-15 03:40:25 UTC
banning guns WILL NOT result in fewer mass shootings, because criminals and/or crazies will always find a way to get a gun, whether legal, or illegal. Banning guns will result in the regular guy not having a gun to defend himself, or his family, when he needs to.
anonymous
2017-11-15 03:07:51 UTC
Banning guns CANNOT stop mass shootings. The reason why is because, in case you can't tell, criminals DON'T CARE if they break one more gun law in order to carry out a mass shooting. Gun laws DIDN'T prevent columbine. Gun laws DIDN'T prevent the Pulse shootings. For that matter, I can't think of a mass shooting that a Gun law even COULD have prevented, because all of these actors really had No Respect for the law, and could have cared less about breaking the law. Therefore Gun laws, in reality only do two things. First, they set up a black-market for contraband that the government has absolutely zero control over. Second, gun laws prevent only law-abiding citizens from having guns. (remember criminals DON'T CARE about breaking your gun law, democrats!), and therefore prevent lawful self-defense. In summation, gun laws make for a more fertile topology for mass shootings, as opposed to actually preventing them.
?
2017-11-15 02:11:18 UTC
No
Bob
2017-11-14 19:44:24 UTC
No it won't, and they are not going to ban guns. Troll on.
F
2017-11-14 18:17:39 UTC
Disagree to a point. Guns are generally illegal in UK but we have had mass shootings. However the last 3 (non terrorist) were 2010, 1996 and 1987, 3 in 30 years. (all legal gun owner BTW). USA seems to have at least 3 a year.
Proud Deplorable
2017-11-14 16:00:25 UTC
Strongly disagree
Kyle the Kind Commenter
2017-11-14 01:21:10 UTC
Disagree. People will still manage to get their hands on guns.
anonymous
2017-11-18 11:07:10 UTC
yes
?
2017-11-17 16:18:52 UTC
If guns don't exist for the public how can you have a shooting. You don't get mass shootings in the UK because the public don't have access to guns. The argument to keep guns is more about civil liberties than it actually has to do win owning a gun.
Jack
2017-11-16 23:44:55 UTC
DISAGREE
Kayla
2017-11-16 21:10:30 UTC
yes
Jerry S
2017-11-16 18:53:56 UTC
too many guns in circulation for a ban to do any good, disagree.
THE snake
2017-11-16 12:50:49 UTC
Never forget PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE NOT GUNS banning guns will not stop mass shootings ever,ever,ever!!!
anonymous
2017-11-16 06:04:55 UTC
Disagree
Trilobiteme
2017-11-16 05:07:48 UTC
underground markets are harder for the government to trace
Matthew
2017-11-16 05:00:08 UTC
Disagree, doing more backgrounds checks and testing mentally stability and taking illegal gun modifications off the market will stop mass shootings.
Chad
2017-11-15 23:37:30 UTC
Fundamentally disagree. The criminals will always have guns - legal or otherwise. If u take the honest peoples' way of self defense away, we're sitting ducks. Everyone that's fit to have a firearm, should be ISSUED and given training on safe use. You'll leave that not so defense-less old lady alone if u know there's a solid chance she's packing.
yana
2017-11-15 20:23:40 UTC
Banning guns will In fact not stop mass shootings because I believe people will still find a way to get there hands on a gun, no matter what. But banning guns will not stop this problem because all the guns sold in America.
anonymous
2017-11-15 19:37:13 UTC
Disagree
anonymous
2017-11-15 18:36:23 UTC
8
pmt853
2017-11-15 15:35:10 UTC
I assume this post relates to the USA, not to a country which already has strict gun controls. On that basis I disagree, there would almost certainly be more. However, vastly better gun control should reduce the number and save many, many lives.
anonymous
2017-11-15 09:22:39 UTC
Disagree because criminals will ALWAYS find them!
Denise
2017-11-15 06:45:53 UTC
Australia banned guns. We have no mass shootings.
zeno
2017-11-15 04:48:28 UTC
Disagree ... The real solution to ending mass shooting is to deport

All democrats. As they are responsible for 99% of all murders in our

Country. Go fact check that. Democrats create lawlessness and sanctuary

Cities where criminals are encouraged to run wild and rape and loot

And murder as much as they want. This is the fruit of the DNC.
Bernard
2017-11-15 01:32:29 UTC
I would agree that putting a ban on guns into effect would certainly have some impressionable degree of positive change in the numbers of injuries, crimminal incidents, and deaths due to accidental mishandling and homicides.

Is it a cure for the problem? Alone, no.

What we need is an realistic and effective approach that wiil actually bring about major changes in the way we as a nation address the issue of gun control, gun ownership, and the criminal

misuse guns.

The time is long overdue for a major overhail in the at every level in the world of politics. It begins with the average John and Jane Doe out on the streets boycotting, demonstrating, voting, and demanding that their potential leaders undergo an extensive and thurough forensic background analysis by independent, honest properly trained authorities who will then investigate and report any findings to both the courts and the general public before getting the go ahead to run for office. While in office candidates must and will agree to remain under constant surveilance of all forms in order to remain free of accusations of misuse of political position and authority, and their personal wealth and business dealings will become a matter of public record and will remain so until end of term. Also each year will be graded and evaluated to determine if candidate will remain in office. Failure to show progress in first two years will result in mandatory public hearing to decide if candidate should remain in office or not.

If evedence of misuse of office or any other criminal acivity is discovered before, during, or after term the penalty will stand.No EXCEPTONS OR EXCUSES UNLESS OTHERWISE RECOMMENDED.

This protocol is something that is long overdue and should have been implemented into the world's political system right from the start. All those considering a career in politics should be aware that they woulb be undergoing an excruciating forensic process until they leave the world of politics. a system like this is sure to gain astounding results once put into use!!!!!!
tigeress
2017-11-14 01:26:21 UTC
Well, it would certainly make it harder to commit mass murder. Every day someone takes out their anger on innocent victims. We need to do more to protect them against gun violence.



Unfortunately, this country is so saturated with guns that it would be easier to ban the mentally deranged. It would be easier to confine violent individuals in mental institutions like they did before Reagan closed them all down so he could give the wealthy huge tax breaks.
Eric the Woodshed
2017-11-14 01:15:29 UTC
Well it won't stop them entirely, but it will make them fewer and farther between. In this sense, banning assault weapons and regular guns would have the same effect, so this isn't a reason to ban guns altogether, it's a reason to ban the guns used to kill a lot of people at once.
?
2017-11-18 02:04:24 UTC
Disagree
?
2017-11-17 23:12:13 UTC
I would say yes but it’s so many illegal guns out there that it’s still possible
Rajeev
2017-11-17 06:55:55 UTC
Yes
anonymous
2017-11-17 06:37:17 UTC
Here in Australia after a weirdo went berserk with a military style rifle at a popular tourist site killing 35 people including small children the government of Australia banned all automatic and semi automatic firearms. Why do people need handguns and assault rifles that are specifically designed to kill people. They are not designed to hunt animals and are designed for use by the military with the purpose of killing those who are seen as the enemy. Since the Australian government gun buyback in the mid 1990s we have not had a mass murder since. There have been a few who have held a group of people in a siege but as the weapons do not have the ability to shoot more than 1 bullet at a time and need to be reloaded with a bolt or similar it slows down the gunman's ability to shoot a lot of people before police with automatic weapons can deal with them. I think there is also a limit to how many bullets a magazine can hold all designed to slow down a gunman to give others a chance to escape or overpower them.

Banning automatic weapons and handguns has been a fantastic success in Australia. When will the US government realize the mass killings in the US will not stop until the common person has been forced to give up their deadly toys. For many that is what they are deadly toys. The USA bans children toys they deem as unsafe but allow adults to walk around the streets with weapons designed only to kill people.

Sensible gun control works and it is time Americans stood up against the American Rifle Association and asked them why do you need so many rifles, Automatic shotguns, assault rifles, and handguns. Why do you need to have a weapon designed to only kill people, why do you need a gun that will shoot a spray of bullets in 2 or 3 seconds with a giant magazine that holds a huge number of bullets unless you are going to shoot a lot of people in a short time. We see so many American TV shows with Americans showing off their gun collections. We see so many American TV shows that guns are drawn as so it is a normal part of every American's day.

You will never get rid of all the illegal guns but there should be severe Prison terms for those who own illegal firearms. Police in Australia still find automatic weapons and illegal handguns and their owners face serious criminal charges. But the fact is the madmen and weirdos generally don't have access to illegal weapons and those who belong to pistol clubs still can use them at the gun range but can't take them home. A hunter does not need a gun than can fire a huge number of bullets in a couple seconds. Come on America stop this Bullsh!t that guns save lives.
Timothy
2017-11-17 00:01:26 UTC
Disagree Banning Guns }BANNING the *** WHO Kill WILL stop THE *** who kill?
anonymous
2017-11-16 13:17:03 UTC
no
Bryan
2017-11-16 05:46:18 UTC
No. Anyone crazy enough to murder innocent people will find away. Maybe they stop shooting but something more terrible will take its place. Plus on the criminal side most gangs have illegal guns anyways. Unfortunately America is not some cut off Small island so guns will always be available from other countries. Let these other countries find out there’s a profit to be made trading in guns and we will be flooded. You make it illegal and people will still own them. Better laws and screening would make a huge difference.
anonymous
2017-11-16 01:12:48 UTC
not at all
?
2017-11-15 19:40:44 UTC
People will still have guns and bullets they brought prior to the banning. The government would have to take it from their homes.
anonymous
2017-11-15 17:40:26 UTC
yes stop this policy
anonymous
2017-11-15 15:07:22 UTC
How can you ban millions of guns that are already there
anonymous
2017-11-15 13:34:01 UTC
Yes if assault l weapons are banned. There is proof in statistical analysis when Congress did ban Assault weapons there for ten years, there was less mass shootings.

Time mag. had a chart showing the information.

The second amendment is a broad law like any other law when it was written. Lawmakers make "vague ' laws that way so the court can interpret what the lawmaker meant in future court challenges.
anonymous
2017-11-15 09:38:32 UTC
yh
?
2017-11-15 04:58:32 UTC
Criminals will find ways to get guns, meanwhile innocents won't be able to defend themselves
Gabe
2017-11-15 02:56:19 UTC
Under what rock in what cave on what other world in the solar system while high on what drugs have you been,,, not to know that TERRORISTS, CRIMINALS, MASS SHOOTERS ALREADY HAVE GUNS AND/OR OTHER DEADLY WEAPONS REGARDLESS OF THE LAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THEY ALWAYS HAVE SUCH THINGS, SINCE BY DEFINITION, THEY ARE BREAKERS AND DISREGARDERS OF THE LAW!!!!!!! And on those RARE occasions when they don't out and out break the law, they go around it and/or, still commit terrible acts while STILL TECHNICALLY FOLLOWING whatever laws are already on the books!!!! Remember the truck massacre in France?!!?!? Maybe THEY should have fewer semis?!?!?!?! Or the fact that Mass Shootings typically happen in particular places in the US,,,, WHERE POSSESSION OF A GUN IS ALREADY ILLEGAL!?!?! Like public schools?!?!? Just like banning alcohol stopped alcohol-abuse-related-ills? Mass shootings happen most often,,, in places where guns are already banned, ie public schools, and, for that matter, mass shootings themselves are already banned. To prevent mass shootings in THEIR OWN immediate vicinity, our politicians hire armed, firearmed, guards. Will opinions change about an unarmed populace being the first requirement for mass shootings change, when the Las Vegas security guard was unable to stop the shooter, due to being unarmed himself???????? Indeed, indeed there will be,,, just as there are less mass shootings in Nice, France!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Most American gun violence is due to Cities such as Washington DC, Chicago,,, which have very strict gun control laws,,,, and the most gun crimes. Remove THEM, and we are fourth from the bottom of Gun-Country violence!!!!!!!!
?
2017-11-15 01:51:41 UTC
Disagree. Criminals and murderers will just find guns again, and because no law abiding citizens will have bullets going the other way, casualties would skyrocket within the next year every time there’s a mass shooting in America. (Which seems like every 2 or 3 months these days)
anonymous
2017-11-14 22:16:21 UTC
Banning firearms would have no effect on the number of mass shooting. Did the law banning murder stop mass shootings? Did banning illegal drugs stop the masses from using illegal drugs?



Highly DISAGREE!
Bryce
2017-11-14 20:27:58 UTC
disagree
Ricky
2017-11-14 18:19:25 UTC
In Mexico any type of guns are banned. Do you see shootings down in Mexico ?
Steven
2017-11-14 01:32:47 UTC
disagree.
?
2017-11-17 15:52:12 UTC
Banning guns will reduce shootings. However it will not reduce murder or killing.
anonymous
2017-11-17 04:00:36 UTC
This is a largely populated country with a lot of guns and gun owners. They will fail at taking guns away.
anonymous
2017-11-16 17:30:47 UTC
in a word...to some extent
anonymous
2017-11-16 15:17:54 UTC
Common sense....... no guns.........no gun violence. BUT it will not stop mass killings. Azzholes will always find a way, bombs, cars, trucks, poison, knives, swords,
anonymous
2017-11-16 15:15:02 UTC
Disagree. Banning guns won't stop mass shootings. There might not be anymore mass shooters, but the mentally unstable thugs like Elliot Rodger and Stephen Paddock are neutering guns for everyone by the government at the direct expense of the good hearted people who know when to use their guns at the right time, when the timing is right.



Black market has all the guns many banned gun users will look for, and even a gun ban will still never stop mass shooting violence plus violent psuedo-phraseology rhetoric from the Liberals.
anonymous
2017-11-16 14:33:19 UTC
What are you supposed to shoot if there's no guns dumb question what are you trying to get at
anonymous
2017-11-16 12:45:30 UTC
AGREE
Jeff
2017-11-16 05:02:04 UTC
If like to think so
Mikayla
2017-11-16 04:47:42 UTC
Disagree. If someone wants to kill a bunch of people, they will find a way. Most mass shooters shouldn't have had a gun under our current gun laws. That worked out great. All more gun laws would do is disarm the people who would stop the mad men.
anonymous
2017-11-16 00:58:53 UTC
agree
busterwasmycat
2017-11-15 20:31:29 UTC
Yes, if we banned them 100 years ago. Now, there are simply guns everywhere, and whether we try to ban them or not, it won't matter. It would take decades before mass shootings became uncommon.
anonymous
2017-11-15 18:41:17 UTC
Disagree, but enforcing a ban on machine guns and a limit on total number of guns will.
?
2017-11-15 08:31:29 UTC
Disagree - criminals will still be able to get hold of them

However, I think that the number of shootings will reduce, because the "spur of the moment" attacks will be more difficult to carry out if guns are hard to get hold of
anonymous
2017-11-15 05:36:28 UTC
Very strongly agree.
?
2017-11-15 02:48:08 UTC
Agree
?
2017-11-15 01:29:37 UTC
It wont matter people will find other ways to buy guns, illegally. So theres no point in banning them
?
2017-11-15 00:47:35 UTC
Probably lower the chances of one happening or at least make it more difficult for the shooter to commit the shooting. However, people will always find a way to obtain a gun, perhaps by hiding them away during a mass ‘hand-in’ of guns. The black market will likely see a lot more customers.
anonymous
2017-11-14 20:20:46 UTC
Agree, Australia is already proof that gun control is effective
anonymous
2017-11-14 17:22:30 UTC
Hi
Kat
2017-11-14 16:07:32 UTC
Bannig guns or stricter gun Laws, will do nothing

I could get a gun off the street go on a killing spree and get arrested,

while your still filling out paperwork to get that same gun.

Sad but true!!
?
2017-11-17 20:21:13 UTC
not really i mean yes it will but people in america are stupid and always do stupid things that are illegal so even though banning guns might look like it would stop the mass shootings but really people can still make it illegal by still using guns even if they are banned
anonymous
2017-11-17 20:11:22 UTC
Disagree! Besides, do you want the shooters to become bombers?
Zeccheus
2017-11-17 10:42:25 UTC
Of course it will.
?
2017-11-17 02:44:02 UTC
I disagree! Those who want ot kill, will!
?
2017-11-17 00:43:17 UTC
I think that people should have to go through mental health evaluations, background checks, have a solid reason for buying one and a safe place to put it where no one can gain access to it to own a gun. It only makes sense if someone is depressed then they wouldn't be able to buy one which is a good thing because a lot of mass shooters are depressed.
heyhowzitgoin
2017-11-16 15:28:42 UTC
Not in America. But it may encourage crazies to lash-out and commit even more violent crime.
Sylvia
2017-11-16 05:29:07 UTC
Yeah
?
2017-11-16 03:10:43 UTC
disagree
?
2017-11-16 00:48:10 UTC
Disagree, there will still be violence
anonymous
2017-11-15 20:52:59 UTC
Political sucide so go on try and no Americans are entitled to bear arms just need to be lifted to what guns.
?
2017-11-15 15:19:31 UTC
Good
?
2017-11-15 15:02:05 UTC
Disagree
Benjamin
2017-11-15 14:11:35 UTC
Ban guns if you want civil war.... There are 1.2 firearms per American on a low estimate.... You think people are going to give away thier guns?
?
2017-11-15 11:08:01 UTC
It won't there is something called illegal guns. There are estimated into the millions that the govt has no idea who owns them or where they are. Plus banning guns goes against the rights as Americans its unconstitutional will never happen. Almost the. Majority of mass shootings mental health was a contributing factor. There needs to be mental health evaluations before owning a gun and every so many years a re check.
anonymous
2017-11-15 07:21:53 UTC
I disagree. Look, I am brazilian, and here in Brazil, the guns have been banned, it's been a long time since that. Now who do you think it's controling the country? the criminals! We walk the streets afraid of someone come behind and put a gun in our heads. The criminals have guns, and we cannot have it? Why? I disagree.



I think that must have a control of guns sells, not sell for any one. At least a psichological test before it sells. When somebody wants to kill, they kill it, with a shotgun, with a knife, or with any other thing.
?
2017-11-15 07:19:25 UTC
Agree
Andy F
2017-11-14 18:27:18 UTC
Disagree, but as Fluffy Dasher wrote, it could be a first step in making mass shootings less common.



There are now something like 300 million guns in the US, although only about 1/3 of the population owns guns. If the government tried to ban guns, some of the existing stockpile would undoubtedly make its way into the hands of nut jobs and criminals and sociopaths.



OTOH, if we somehow reduced the total number of guns in our society, especially semi-automatic weapons, it would slowly become harder for would-be mass murderers to obtain them,



In turn, that might bring down the frequency of sociopaths, narcissists and escaped mental patients using rapid-fire weapons to slaughter school children, church-goers and people attending Batman movies.



It might mean fewer mass shootings by political and religious terrorists, too.
anonymous
2017-11-14 16:49:56 UTC
Agree,



It works look at the U.K and Australia.
?
2017-11-14 01:40:33 UTC
Just stop making bullets for them
?
2017-11-14 01:15:23 UTC
not stop, reduce.
franfifi@sbcglobal.net
2017-11-19 22:52:19 UTC
If some nut out there wants to kill a lot of people he don't need a gun, he can use a car a truck,, or build a bomb. When they are able to take away our guns only the crazy ones will have guns.; There will always be some way for people to get guns if they want them.
?
2017-11-18 11:05:18 UTC
Disagree. Prohibiting ATTACK RIFLES and avoiding psychologically unsteady individuals from owning weapons will stop mass shootings.
anonymous
2017-11-18 04:20:21 UTC
Agree..
TX.
2017-11-17 12:44:40 UTC
NO because if someone wants to kill, they will find a way to do it...look at ok. city a bomb was used there ,and ny. here lately, a pick up trk was used....taking guns away will make no difference if someone has their mind set on it, they will find a way.
?
2017-11-17 07:16:18 UTC
yes
Michael
2017-11-17 02:19:37 UTC
Disagree. People who carry out shootings will get their hands on firearms whether they're legal or not, which means all that is accomplished is the disarming of citizens who could in fact stop shootings should they ever witness one while carrying.
?
2017-11-16 19:46:28 UTC
Australia, sandhook massace- after this guns were banned, not a single massacre since. The US has had more gun massacres in the past months than the uk has had in the last decade. So possibly it will stop, mostly likely just greatly decrease.
ThisFieldIsMandatory1996
2017-11-16 00:37:46 UTC
Disagree.
kdf_333
2017-11-15 19:36:18 UTC
it will not stop them completely but there will be less. cuz how many of these guns were bought illegally? how many of them just borrowed/stole a friends? how many of them just went to a gun show and bought them? or went online? or for that matter already owned them?



my solution....i figure every gun is supposedly tracked by the manufacturer. so the govt collects all the assault guns or parts that can make a gun an automatic using the tracking provided by the manufacturers and legal registrations. all those law abiding gun owners will have to give them up though (and they won't.) also make the manufacturers pay for the whole process, fine/tax them. make every seller of guns and gun parts accountable. THEN the only fully and semi automatic guns should be owned by the govt, LEO or criminals. and every person caught with an automatic or parts to make an automatic immediate $2000 fine for every gun or part. every single part from the clips to the bullets make it illegal to own or sell in the USA, kinda like cocaine. mandatory $2000 fines and jail time for repeat offenders. same punishment for every website that teaches you how to make a gun an automatic. treat it like child porn; gotta go on the dark web to find it. it will take a long time but it can be done.



BUT LEGAL GUN OWNERS WILL NOT GIVE UP THEIR AUTOMATICS. so they will continue to be sold or parts to make a gun an automatic. basic handgun and rifle is all the everyday citizens should be using for hunting and protection. don't care about your "collection". don't care that it's a slippery slope. the mass shootings used to be in a workplace or a school. now they are random places; people that have no connection to the shooter at all. so we worked on school bullying and making workplaces non toxic environments but you cannot train for a random person deciding to shoot up a concert because he thinks a lot of folks there are against his political beliefs.



the time and money it would cost folks don't want to endure. kids dying though, that they can live with.
anonymous
2017-11-15 12:29:27 UTC
Im not sure if it would make a difference nowadays. The usa has gone too far and is a lost cause. Its a bit late.
anonymous
2017-11-15 06:59:50 UTC
Well first of all if every gun was banned and destroyed in America, there obviously wouldn't be shootings unless guns were imported. That's obvious. If no guns exist there are no shootings.

But I'm not saying let's ban all guns. I disagree with that as I support gun rights. Though it's also obvious we need better background checks and restrictions on certain types of guns (like the same gun that caused the Las Vegas, Orlando, and Texas shootings for example)
?
2017-11-15 06:47:46 UTC
In theory it would, but the hard reality is that there are something approaching half a billion guns in the US. And almost all of the owners would shoot it out, rather than give any of them up. An attempt to enforce a ban might increase the shootings.
anonymous
2017-11-15 06:33:44 UTC
Ban criminals
Smokies Hiker
2017-11-15 03:25:59 UTC
Disagree entirely!
?
2017-11-15 00:00:25 UTC
No, and I don't think anyone's seriously suggesting "banning guns".



However, other countries rarely have this problem and have strategies like:

-Heavy restrictions on automatic firearms and handguns.

-Firearms use requires a firearms license-- which requires a reasonably clean record, safety training, and some real contact with police, not just a half-*ssed "background check".

-Criminals have both their guns and their licenses confiscated.

-Gun shows and private sales are no different from other sales.



It's not a perfect system, but it helps.
?
2017-11-14 23:24:05 UTC
disagree
BulletBite_45
2017-11-14 22:20:11 UTC
If the ban involves the complete destruction of every gun in existence and making it impossible to create any more guns; then yes, I agree.that it will stop mass shootings -- except for the case of other possible projectile weaponry)
Daisy
2017-11-14 18:59:54 UTC
Banning guns will NOT stop mass shootings. Guns can be bought in many ways besides through the legal means. I agree with Java- ban assault rifles and keep the mentally ill from buying weapons of any kind. Also, more should be invested in helping the mentally ill. People should be encouraged to seek help and not feel stigmatized because of their illness.
David
2017-11-14 17:04:57 UTC
Disagree. Banning guns may make them harder for law abiding people to have them but won't slow down the criminals of crazies. Not going to happen anyway, 2nd amendment is here to stay.
Cindy LGPB
2017-11-14 01:12:01 UTC
Heavily regulating guns stopped mass shootings in Australia.
?
2017-11-17 05:57:37 UTC
Agree.
?
2017-11-17 01:42:48 UTC
I think it's a step in the right direction
?
2017-11-16 18:22:22 UTC
Disagree . A gun is a tool . It is the purpose to which it is put that makes it good or bad . The gun has no choice as to what it shoots . It's the idiot that pulls the trigger . I was trained to kill with almost anything . Including my bare hands . It is my choice not to . People need to be trained that killing other people is bad . Guns are not at fault . Its people that are wrong .
Ian
2017-11-16 12:29:09 UTC
In America there will be considerable opposition and non compliance with such a law, so it may not be as effective as it has been in countries like Britain, Australia and China.



Generally any attempts at gun regulations in the US have been pretty weak, full of loop holes and ineffectual. There is little point in regulations which only apply in one state for instance. No point in rules for gun shops which don't apply to gun fairs. Unlike heroin and cocaine, its fairly hard to smuggle guns across a secure border (they are pretty bulky and usually made of metal, although plastic guns made on 3d printers may become common in future), but there are a lot of guns already in the USA.



IMO, gun control is rather like drug control. Social attitudes are at least as important as the law. Whatever the law says, many recreational drugs are accepted in certain circles in the USA, and people freely break the law. In some Muslim countries, alcohol is not entirely illegal, but social pressure stops people from falling down drunk in public. China has drug addicts (about a million), but you wouldn't know it if you visited there, except possibly in some ethnic minority regions. China has draconian drug laws which are totally failing to make drug addicts quit. Solitary confinement for a year for opiate possession, forced withdrawal and a 99% relapse rate. However the general public are largely unaware of this. It's out of sight and out of mind. However any illegal drug use, like gun possession is totally socially unacceptable. The country had opium wars in the past.



The USA has legal alcohol for over 21's (absurdly high age IMO) but generally alcohol is accepted. Frat boys rarely say "no beer, thanks, I'm only 20". Prohibition failed because a significant percentage of the population still wanted to drink socially, in social environments where it was accepted.



A significant proportion of the American population love guns and regard the love of guns as patriotic, a large number also want guns because other people have them and they feel threatened. Criminals find it easy to get guns because legal and illegal guns are so common. Burgle a house, you might well find a gun lying around (not in a locked cabinet).



In this climate,gun laws will always be watered down, people will break them, gun advocates will claim they don't work while trading the huge stockpiles of weapons already in the USA.



Gun control COULD work in the USA, IF the public is fully behind it.



I don't want the total abolition of guns, I support hunting and pest control, but the notion of people being permitted to carry handguns in the street, concealed or unconcealed is absurd to me.



The rest of the world watches US gun culture with disbelief, sees the regular mass shootings and the Americans saying that "guns don't kill people, people kill people" or declaring that we need more people with guns to shoot the mass shooters.



Suicide is more common when people can do it quickly and easily. When domestic gas supplies were poisonous there were more suicides from people sticking their heads in ovens. Likewise, very few mass killings are performed by lone nutters with knives or hammers. It takes too long, and you have to get very close to your victims
anonymous
2017-11-16 08:21:35 UTC
Nope...
zain
2017-11-16 02:55:33 UTC
AGREE
David
2017-11-16 02:49:41 UTC
It would help more than hurt. Only 2 of out of countless others has been stopped by a citizen with a gun. Most mass shooters either bought their guns legally or stole them from a relative.



If not ban, there should be more evaluation if somebody is mentally stable enough to buy a gun.
?
2017-11-15 14:44:51 UTC
Y'ALL ARE STUPID GUN NUTJOB REDNECKS AND COMPLETE WHITE TRAILER TRASH **** Y'ALL
anonymous
2017-11-15 13:54:19 UTC
You would rather be hacked to death with machetes or blown to pieces with homemade bombs?
anonymous
2017-11-15 12:11:18 UTC
must have to
anonymous
2017-11-15 05:37:03 UTC
Well no guns means no mass shootings of course, but the idiots will just find another way to inflict mass Hysteria upon the public. Like mass bombing or knifings ECT.
Eric
2017-11-15 02:40:15 UTC
disagree
The Football God
2017-11-15 00:20:18 UTC
AGREE. A mass killer would NEVER risk breaking the law.
anonymous
2017-11-14 23:57:25 UTC
It will but people still need guns for hunting. Lets just ban conservatives from owning them, problem solved.
?
2017-11-14 20:41:55 UTC
AGree
Q The First Timelord
2017-11-14 20:22:38 UTC
It may stop mass shootings, but violence will quite likely find another way to manifest itself.



Stop being so naive.
?
2017-11-14 18:27:04 UTC
Oh yeah, all criminals who shoot ppl will gladly surrender their MILLIONS of guns they collectively own for sure, no doubt.....
Annonymous
2017-11-14 13:50:41 UTC
We will never know will we?
Jake No Chat
2017-11-14 03:39:39 UTC
Disagree. Those that want to do mass killings (guns or not), will find a way.
Goggles
2017-11-14 01:12:33 UTC
Disagree;

Banning guns would allow government and criminals to have the advantage on the innocent.



How's that War on Drugs doing for ya?
Grinning Football plinny younger
2017-11-17 14:21:21 UTC
Seems to work for the UK and Australia.
just malcolm
2017-11-17 14:20:18 UTC
Doesn't matter to me.



I will keep on living in England and know peace and harmony that you guys can't ever know from now on.



I'll keep an eye on your shootings and gun crimes and how many people are killed while living out my life here and trying to obtain the things i want to get (without worrying about being shot)
oneofmagi@rocketmail.com
2017-11-17 08:40:36 UTC
No person with a gun in the street.
?
2017-11-16 21:06:09 UTC
no
Jackboot
2017-11-16 06:56:07 UTC
I don’t simply disagree. It is in fact false that banning guns will stop mass shootings. Prospective mass shooters will simply manufacture their own guns!



https://amp.azcentral.com/amp/868778001
?
2017-11-16 01:10:27 UTC
agree
?
2017-11-16 01:05:00 UTC
Idk
?
2017-11-16 00:02:38 UTC
It's like drugs, you can make them illegal all you want it won't ever stop people from taking drugs or dealing them just like gun attacks won't stop happening, people will get them illegally
John
2017-11-15 22:13:49 UTC
It doesn't do any good to ask for opinions on this. Let's look at some facts about what has and hasn't worked with other countries: https://gimletmedia.com/episode/guns/
Barton
2017-11-15 20:19:49 UTC
Disagree, they are usually obtained illegally anyhow.
?
2017-11-15 19:20:33 UTC
Of course it will.. Maniacs cant just go buy a weopin easily. 99 pecent problem solved..
?
2017-11-15 19:07:06 UTC
Disagree, because criminals will still find ways to get guns whether they are banned or not.
?
2017-11-15 18:24:08 UTC
Sure.
anonymous
2017-11-15 17:21:21 UTC
yes, let our loving trustworthy government take away our guns so they can protect you instead you to protecting yourselves. 🙃
CYNICAL
2017-11-15 16:05:47 UTC
maybe
anonymous
2017-11-14 23:38:00 UTC
no



maybe reduce, but stop? thats unrealistic
Elroy Jetson
2017-11-14 22:27:26 UTC
Probably not. Because in the case of the Texas church shooter, he should have never been able to purchase a gun. The Army screwed up in not reporting his mental disorder. Pretty sure he would have found a way to get a gun illegally. As far as mass killings by other means, I have been watching aboout knife murders in Japan. It seems where mental disability is concerned, where there's a will, there's a way. So I will say no. Only criminals will have guns (and knives).
Bryan
2017-11-14 17:17:14 UTC
No it would not. That would only hurt responsible gun owners. With over 300 million firearms in circulation in the USA alone, nothing will bring a complete halt to such shootings. Through background checks, including a mental health background check would help reduce some of the shootings. Also an important question should be asked: "Will anyone in your household who has been convicted of a felony or has a history of mental illness have access to the weapon." When I sold firearms I was in the process of a call to the state police for a clearance to sell to an individual. The fact that a woman who was 5' 2" and weighed around 110 lbs. wanted to purchase a 12 gauge shotgun made me a bit suspicious considering her boyfriend was about 6 ft. tall and 220 lbs. As I was on the phone I overheard her boyfriend telling another friend that he could not buy a gun because of his felony record. I immediately had to stop the sale. Had this question been on the authorization form I would not have even called it in. His girlfriend would have been committing a crime by making this "straw" purchase. I wonder how many sales have been made in just this manner putting firearms in criminal hands. We would probably only reduce the number of these shootings. This is not 1794 when the second amendment was passed into law. A time when firearms were a necessity for many.
peterparaskos
2017-11-14 04:41:25 UTC
Strongly Agree. Mass shootings never happen in Australia.
?
2017-11-14 01:12:46 UTC
I have to agree. If they don't have guns, how will they shoot!?
Edward
2017-11-17 19:49:01 UTC
Disagreement
Spear
2017-11-17 16:32:46 UTC
Nope. Marijuana has been illegal for a long time, but nobody seems to have any trouble getting it. Mass shootings are done by criminals. Criminals have no qualms about breaking the law. Laws prohibiting the acquisition and use of guns by those who don't follow the law anyway will serve no purpose. Besides, think of it like this: It's already illegal to bring a firearm onto a public school campus. Did that stop Sandy Hook from happening? Nope.
?
2017-11-17 15:16:30 UTC
No. Because people can still aquire things through illegal means. There's a whole black market for weapons. Even if America takes away guns from everyone, the people who shouldn't have them will still find ways to get them. Besides, I think we should all have guns specifically so we can defend ourselves against people like that.
Zotek
2017-11-17 05:42:16 UTC
Yes which idiot made the rule of allowing guns.
?
2017-11-17 03:19:39 UTC
Stop, no. Greatly decrease,..yes.
Hajari
2017-11-17 01:05:15 UTC
Yes i am agree
Sandra K
2017-11-16 21:40:35 UTC
Disagree!
anonymous
2017-11-16 18:14:24 UTC
No, the only way to stop mass shootings is to kill all the members of the NRA - God will take care of this on the day of Judgement. Revelation 20:9, 15



Anybody at all who supports the Second Amendment will be exterminated.
Boy
2017-11-16 14:40:33 UTC
Guns can save lives. This is a hard one. Depends on who use it of cause. I don't support selling weapons.
?
2017-11-16 06:10:23 UTC
Then only (mostly) bad people would STILL have them.
?
2017-11-16 02:22:13 UTC
Only if the criminals will stop to read the small print on the laws.
Yaneli
2017-11-16 00:32:46 UTC
No 👎
T'rone
2017-11-16 00:07:28 UTC
Venezuela did and now they are the world's most dangerous nation. Also, banning drugs worked. After all, no one uses them. Every since drugs were banned, people stopped using and selling them.
Lukas
2017-11-15 20:51:04 UTC
disagree theres always ways to get your hands on things you normally couldn't
Retta
2017-11-15 16:58:10 UTC
Some will always get guns illegally.
anonymous
2017-11-15 10:13:58 UTC
Of course it won't. Criminals will always find a way to get guns. But it would sure cut them down. The stuff like when some dumb kid shoots up his school using his dad's AK-47 because some girl ditched him, would be stopped.

However, it doesn't tend to be criminals that carry out mass shootings. It's the guy with a chip on his shoulder.
Yayayay
2017-11-15 05:26:24 UTC
People are shooting people due to a culture that has gone sick. You, me, the government, and The rest of the world play a part in the process of creating mentally unstable individuals. The world is in the process of healing itself. This pain youre feeling is sulpose to happen. We are all just too incompetent to deal with our global issues. you must change your minds. It is not up to the government to fix all your worries. Wake the **** up and lets all work together. Think im wrong? You're all lazy. Peace is achievable
anonymous
2017-11-14 23:18:14 UTC
Yes, take away the tool needed to commit the mass shootings, and you prevent the mass shootings. For those who say it's un-doable, I say: Don't we try to ban child porn, even though we know there's always gonna be some way for a determined pervert to get or make some? Would you counsel our law enforcement officers to just give up and let it be legalized?
AllyLassa⚘
2017-11-14 01:54:41 UTC
Disagree.
?
2017-11-14 01:17:05 UTC
Absolutely not! A Criminal on a mission will find those guns regardless!!! Just walk up, into a bad neighborhood with cash and ask for one, It's as easy as getting Meth... This would only Hurt the general population, and people who actually keep those guns for protection! ...Banning guns will simply take away the "Rights" to own One.,, from non violent, protective, and honest people! While giving criminals the chance to Kill, Rob, Attack, others without repercussions!
jayanth
2017-11-17 12:42:12 UTC
will definitely decrease
Alpha Foxtrot
2017-11-16 07:50:26 UTC
No. as long as some people have their guns, there's still a possibility that they use it in a wrong way/manner. GUNS MUST BE CONFISCATED
S
2017-11-16 05:25:22 UTC
I do not agree to getting rid of all guns but I do think these horrid man killers (all they were made for) need to be banned .
elle
2017-11-15 21:35:26 UTC
retards should not be able to get guns plain and simple.
anonymous
2017-11-15 16:10:49 UTC
True, banning gun nuts with multiple gun arsenals and assualt weapons and bombs stops multiple killings facts
anonymous
2017-11-15 02:33:32 UTC
Disagree and agree there’s advantages and disadvantages
?
2017-11-15 00:51:52 UTC
Disagree

The criminal will always get guns
anonymous
2017-11-14 22:18:26 UTC
It did in Australia. They proved that it not only can be done but that it is effective in ending the slaughter.
Hiroshi
2017-11-14 03:38:32 UTC
Disagree!
?
2017-11-14 01:19:23 UTC
and don't forget the burning of the library in Alexandria, Egypt.
anonymous
2017-11-14 01:17:54 UTC
Leftists love bombs they just forgot.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...