Yes, thee may be a situation where you cannot reach your sidearm in time, but if you have no sidearm option whatsoever, that time will be 100% of the times. Id much rather have a sidearm than not in case that issue presents itself. People who are not fans of being armed usually have never used a firearm. In counties that have civilians that carry, crime rate is much lower than compared to an area that has strict gun control laws. The most violent firearms crime rates present themselves in primarily "no gun zone" counties. The reason is that no matter what we do, a criminal with bad intentions can get a firearm if wanted to enough. Law abiding citizens will not carry due to following their state laws.
Please, tell me how many people you know that have had a weapon drawn on them. Now tell me the likelihood of you pulling a weapon out in that situation successfully. Now tell me the likelihood of someone pulling a gun on a family if it is hard for them to acquire a gun. You see, by limiting guns, you lessen the likelihood of someone pulling a weapon on your family (which is already a very small chance - over 99% of families have never experienced that).
So the argument that you NEED a gun because it will protect you against a situation that you will most likely never face, makes no sense whatsoever. When you lessen control of firearms, you increase the chance that someone will threaten you with a firearm because more people will be in possession of firearms.
You're wrong on lower crime rates when people are armed, but where's my nuke incase thenrussians come to get me? Crimals will always get guns but it's not like we make it harder for them to like other countries. A nuke MIGHT protect me my family so I need it.
If you make certain guns illegal then finding one of those guns will allow the police to press a more thorough search, because owning one of those guns in itself would be a crime. In America, finding someone who owns a deadly weapon does not allow them to press a thorough search because owning a concealable, magazine-carrying weapon is a right. There is a problem there. If someone is legally allowed to own a handgun, then that makes them capable of many violent crimes. I like rights and freedoms, but I don't think people should have the freedom to hold a tool designed to kill people. It's an outdated law fuelled by America's weapons industry.
Actually states with easier ccw laws fund that violent crime rates dramatically dropped after the laws went into effect as potential criminals realized they couldn't go around unchecked because there is the thread of armed citizens that can and will protect themselves .... Ever wonder why most mass killings guns or otherwise are in "gun-free" zones? Cause criminals know they cannot be challenged in those areas till police arrive to stop them ...by then it being far to late !!!
Funny how that stat doesn't work cause you can look at every country with strict gun laws have a insanely low violent crime rate compared to the states, like japan Sweden Plus crimals could "never go unchecked" I could buy a fun illegally just like them
Sweden everyone's armed lol .... Niether is comparable to the United States anyway as we have the third largest population in the world .. With bigger populations and densities U will always end up with more crime .... Just like big cities vs small towns Comparing states inside the USA is the only good comparison U can possible make
The "fuelled by weapons industry" may make me look nuts, but it happens. I'm not saying it's for sure, but it's likely. Why else would America be one of the only developed countries to be as relaxed on guns as it is? Oil companies have funded anti-climate change ads/research, tobacco companies did similar trying to promote smoking as cool, and various companies have done similar things to try to stay in business. I don't see it as much of a stretch to say that weapons companies depend on the general public to purchase firearms in order for them to stay in business
Japan is WAY more dense. You can't use the density argument to explain away why America has more crime. Britain and Japan are way denser than America, yet both have less violent crime. Another thing about violent crime in states that have bans on certain guns... The laws are in place BECAUSE of the high crime rates. The crime rates aren't a result of stricter gun laws. ... Yet, restricting guns in individual states makes little sense to me. I get that point. Smuggling guns between states would be too easy... They would have to be restricted on a national scale to make policing easier. The point of gun control is to keep guns away from criminals... Thereby hurting a criminal's ability to commit violent crime.