I learned the fact that chicago had become the most dangerous place out of the entire United State. with the highest number of murder done by guns. But the state law had forbidden the ownership of guns.so why is all this happening? should guns really be allowed to be owned personally?

Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

As you see above, the purpose of having civilians bearing arm is to protect our nation when great danger like a invasion. But we have a army now! a ready-steady and well organized army. So why we need militias? Also why we need the right to bear arm?

Easy answer to the question "would banning guns decrease violent crimes by guns":

What is a Criminal?
One who commits crimes.

If guns are banned, what will owning a gun be considered?
A Crime.

If guns are banned, then criminals will ignore the law and still get guns: they'll just get better at concealing them.


And the right to bear arms and organize militias is not to protect against foreign governments, it's to protect against our OWN government, so that if the government tries to get too powerful, we can defend against it.

Ash summed it up nicely enough

I'd also like to point out that, having been to Chicago many times, I can say from experience that downtown Chicago is a very clean, safe rural area to be in.

It's the south side that's notorious for the crime rate, and it's nothing like the Chicago people usually imagine when they think of it.

Why would we get rid of them? I see nothing positive about it other than it'd give these BAWWWWing soccer moms some kind of false peace.

That is true,the criminal get guns whether they are banned or not. But what should the government do about all the gun violence going on in college, for example: the Virginia Tech Campus Shooting. ( If we go to far on this we might be going into the racism things)

Also defending the country in time of war is one of the original purpose of the right to bear arm. But you are still right about how it is in present days.(Defending the civil rights of the people)

Quote from Exilement

Ash summed it up nicely enough

I'd also like to point out that, having been to Chicago many times, I can say from experience that downtown Chicago is a very clean, safe rural area to be in.

It's the south side that's notorious for the crime rate, and it's nothing like the Chicago people usually imagine when they think of it.

You are ignoring the dark side of it.
I live in Chicago, pretty close to the southside, like you said.
That's where all the Gangsters and other peoples doing their things. I can't walk more than 100 feet without hearing someone shouting offensive things at me or beg for money from me.

Quote from chinaman0

That is true,the criminal get guns whether they are banned or not. But what should the government do about all the gun violence going on in college, for example: the Virginia Tech Campus Shooting. ( If we go to far on this we might be going into the racism things)

What should they do? Easy. Do a better job identifying unstable students. Teachers in the US are currently given ZERO formal training in the matter, an dI think that all teachers should spend a good amount of time learning psycology so they can understand the needs and weaknesses of invdividual students and potentially prevent Columbine-esque massacres.

Quote from Ash

What should they do? Easy. Do a better job identifying unstable students. Teachers in the US are currently given ZERO formal training in the matter, and I think that all teachers should spend a good amount of time learning psycology so they can understand the needs and weaknesses of invdividual students and potentially prevent Columbine-esque massacres.

That's a good solution, but it's not a part of most teacher's learning and job descriptions to psychologically identify potential serial killers. It wouldn't be hard to identify one, and I suppose a few lessons in college about mass murderers' minds wouldn't hurt.

Perhaps giving guns only to people able to pass a test in sanity or mental health would help, but advanced security on the guns, and the people who hold them are the only solutions I see in criminals stealing guns when they can't get their own.

banning guns isnt going to get rid of the problem, and niether will giving a gun to everyone solve the problem.

Quote from Ash

What should they do? Easy. Do a better job identifying unstable students. Teachers in the US are currently given ZERO formal training in the matter, an dI think that all teachers should spend a good amount of time learning psycology so they can understand the needs and weaknesses of invdividual students and potentially prevent Columbine-esque massacres.

It seems like you're just trying to avoid the issue. Guns aid bad dudes in carrying out their work. The guy at Virginia Tech wouldn't have been able to access guns illegally nearly as easily.

Tell the families of the victims that guns should stay.

You all miss the fact that laws have two sides: Preventing somebody from doing something, and gaining the ability to punish him if he did.

By banning guns, people found having them can actually be punished. It's the side of the coin that always gets lost in debates like this.

Quote from ScHaLL

It's the side of the coin that always gets lost in debates like this.

Maybe I should just quote my post so you don't have to actually read it:

Quote from Ash

If guns are banned, then criminals will ignore the law and still get guns: they'll just get better at concealing them.

Criminals are creative people. They have to be: their trade is at stake.

They'll just get better and better at hiding their guns. If I recall correctly, London has many shootings, but guns are illegal there.

Still, you're not really hitting it dead-on.
They will have a harder time concealing guns, but still, they "use" it once and you've already got another thing coming to infract them for. What I'm assuming is that the aggresive usage of firearms would be reduced by such a law. Not the owning of them, but the use of them.

I still don't see how making the use and ownership of guns will stop criminals from using them. I suppose I'm misunderstanding your posts.