Simple. Guns=crime. Period. In Europe they have very strict gun laws and as a result they much lower crime and gun crime rates.

We need automatic weapons to keep up with the crime rates!

Gun's are a tool that is all. Criminals will always use whatever means to get what they want, except when they may have to fight for it on equal terms.

You want to be an attorney, you better know your subject better, or you will be destroyed in court! Do not take anything for granted! Investigate! this was meant to be a comment! for budaman

I believe in the old saying that if you outlaw guns, then only the outlaws will have guns. I live in an area where if you have a break-in the Sheriff will come to your house and fill out a report, and ask you if you own a gun. If you answer "no" then more than likely he will sugguest that you get one. Now he's not telling you to shoot someone, but he is trying to tell you that you shouldn't rely on law enforcement to protect you 100% of the time. This nation adopted the first amendment so that we can protect ourselves, not so that we can let the "law" do it for us. There are times when the law means nothing to the lawless. When someone breaks down the door to your house in the middle of the night which would you rather have a 12 guage shotgun or a copy of the latest gun restriction laws in your hands? The entruder will more likely listen to the universal signal to run coming from my 12 guage pump, than he will to listen to someone just telling him that it is illegal to do what he is doing right now. Because he already knows he's not supposed to be doing what he's doing. Why should decent law abiding citizens be made to suffer by not being able to defend themselves when necessary?

Gun control sounds good but when law abiding people can't attain them the criminals always does. And where does that leave us? Sadly unequaled.

I wouldnt have believed it but, Texas has the most liberal gun laws imaginable http://crime.about.com/library/blgunquiz_tx.htm But It ranks 2nd out of 50 in violent crimes. Everyone it Texas has a gun. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/ranks/rank01.html

Did prohibition work! no it did not! think about it! Remember the only reason you are free is because we are a Republican Form of goverment and we have the right to bear arms, without arms you would be living under a dictatorship!

From the point of view of a criminal: I think that you folks should tighten the gun laws. I would say even ban them altogether. That will be great for my business, cause I hate breaking into homes were the owners are armed. It makes my occupation somewhat dangerous. I'm not going to sweat any gun laws cause I have never legally bought a gun anyway. I get all my guns from Juan down on the corner of 3rd and Washington. Hell I'm a criminal I don't care about laws anyway. So on behalf of all us criminals PLEASE BAN GUNS!

Most crimes are not committed by individuals with properly *licensed* firearms. So I do not believe that gun control will remove weapons from the hands of criminals.

National

My thoughts? A Little Gun Control History Lesson. In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1..5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.. China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million 'educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million. It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)! In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns! There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it. During W.W.II the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED! Note: Admiral Yamamoto who crafted the attack on Pearl Harbor had attended Harvard U 1919-1921 & was Naval Attache© to the U. S. 1925-28. Most of our Navy was destroyed at Pearl Harbor & our Army had been deprived of funding & was ill prepared to defend the country. It was reported that when asked why Japan did not follow up the Pearl Harbor attack with an invasion of the U. S. Mainland, his reply was that he had lived in the U. S. & knew that almost all households had guns. With Guns...........We Are 'Citizens'.. Without Them........We Are 'Subjects'.

(meant to be a comment)

It's a statistically verifiable fact that where there is a concealed carry law in effect, the crime rate goes down, sometimes radically. Taking guns away from honest citizens simply makes them more vulnerable to the criminals, who are going to have guns regardless of any laws.

The more gun control the more crime! Crimals do not care about the law they like taking the guns out of peoples hands that way they will have the guns and the people won't. A local TV advertisement says, "It is better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have one!" This is done by a local police officer and like he also says, "We police cannot be everywhere all the time." Keep yourself safe...own and know how to use a gun and don't be afraid to use it if necessary and ask any cop he will tell you "Shoot to kill not wound; if you wound the criminal they will come back and kill you first chance they get."

supposed to be comment

More gun control, more crime.

They need to stop trying to control guns and work on the criminals. As you can see just about all of the killers and trouble makers here in America are not AMERICAN but immigrants. I will never give up the weapo0n to protect my home against the immigrants that are taking over America.

The more guns there are the more people will get shot.

All law abiding citizens should have the right to own and carry a gun, it should be expected, if not mandated. Guns ownership protects us from criminals and keeps us free from the tyranny of government.

I think that there is very little correlation between the two. The availability of guns doesn't increase or decrease the desire of any individual to commit a crime. It may increase the likelihood of the individual using a firearm in the commission of their particular crime, but the crime would (most likely) have been committed anyway. The exception to this would be the "crime of passion." Where a husband might have gotten mad at his wife and slugged her for some perceived wrong-doing or a wife might have done something subtle to her husband to get even for his infidelity, in a society where guns are everywhere, these same people are able to shoot their spouses while still angry. Blaming crime on gun control, or its lack, is completely deflecting us from the true problem of our society. In our pursuit of the "American Dream" we are taught that breaking the law isn't wrong (after all our Presidents, Politicians and CEOs do it all the time), it's the "getting caught" part that is the real crime. And even if you get caught, if you have access to enough money, you might not be found guilty. The difference between a guy robbing a liquor store at gunpoint for $300 and the guy taking a $3 million bonus (from tax-payer supplied bailout money) for running his company into the ground, isn't that big to someone who's trying to put food on his family's table every night. If you want to reduce the crime rates, start by getting the "real" bad guys some serious jail time and show the disenfranchised in our society that crime truly does not pay. Hope this helps.

Seeya likes to cite the case of Keeesaw , GA which at present has a popualtion of 21,675, hardly a big enough popuation out of over 300 million to draw any hard conclusions. When the law was passed that required that all head of households own a gun there were numerous expections including those that said they could not afford one and those that had a moral objection to owning a gun - so not everyone was required. The NRA and some like to say that the crime rates dropped as much as 98%. The trouble with that is that they only quote those that they agree with but never tell us what others have to say and there are some. I have never understood how those that want less goverment are often the same ones that advocate that we be required to own guns, they can pass laws telling how to behave in our own bedrooms and who can wed. Do they only want less goverment when they don't agree with them and when they will do their bidding they want more? The question itself is bein ignored - "what is the relationship". The relationship is that both good people and bad people get shot with guns. If more or less, good or bad die was not asked.

I see I have been DR for thinking that the more guns there are the more people will be shot. While I believe there is a very simple logic to that and I did not attempt to say if those in the white hats or evil doers are the ones receiving the bullets. I have now rethought my stance and believe that without any guns a lot more will be shoot and if everyone is packing no one will ever be shot. I wish to think those that have help me see the err of my ways and now would everyone please fire their guns at their front doors because they are coming to get you.

meant to be comment.

Wow, many people answering this question are very misinformed. Here's a study done at Harvard with the official states on household gun ownership and the crime rates. Conclusion of the study: "Although our study cannot determine causation, we found that in areas where household firearm ownership rates were higher, a disproportionately large number of people died from homicide." http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1447364