Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Confiscate most guns in the country, and how it could be done [View all]AlexSatan
(535 posts)107. Can you support that claim?
"That's why states with stricter gun control laws have less gun violence. If you were correct, there would be no difference."
In 1976, Washington, D.C. enacted one of the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation. The city's murder rate rose 134 percent through 1996 while the national murder rate has dropped 2 percent.
Among the 15 states with the highest homicide rates, 10 have restrictive or very restrictive gun laws.
Maryland claims to have the toughest gun control laws in the nation and ranks #1 in robberies and #4 in both violent crime and murder.268 . The robbery rate is 70% more than the national average.
In 2000, 20% of U.S. homicides occur in four cities with just six percent of the population New York, Chicago, Detroit, and Washington, D.C. most of which have/had a virtual prohibition on private handguns
Washington, D.C.'s 1976 ban on the ownership of handguns (except those already registered in the District) was not linked to any reduction in gun crime in the nation's capital.
New York has one of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation and 20% of the armed robberies.
In analyzing 10 different possible reasons for the decline in violent crime during the 1990s, gun control was calculated to have contributed nothing (high imprisonment rates, more police and legalized abortion were considered the primary factors, contributing as much as 28% of the overall reduction). - Understanding Why Crime Fell in the 1990s, Steven Levit, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Winter 2004
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
115 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
There would be the added benefit of thousands of angry freepers dying while resisting confiscation
librechik
Dec 2012
#2
Waco ending was chosen by David Korash, the starting of fires was at his orders.
Thinkingabout
Dec 2012
#103
Regrettable? Does that mean acceptable instead of absolutely horrifying? Killing more children? nt
rDigital
Dec 2012
#26
no, it would be a terrible event but the blame would of course be placed squarely
quinnox
Dec 2012
#32
Law enforcement gave Koresh 51 days to surrender. Instead, he continued hugging his guns and raping
Hoyt
Dec 2012
#31
Oh, haven't you heard? There are already some people who want to repeal the Voting
CTyankee
Dec 2012
#86
I love how gun people assume all the gun owners will just turn vicious felons
alcibiades_mystery
Dec 2012
#18
I think the fog of anger over this tragedy has clouded a lot of otherwise excellent minds.
cherokeeprogressive
Dec 2012
#71
" Because those laws allow us to stop drunk drivers before they kill someone."
Ghost in the Machine
Dec 2012
#110
my OP is predicated on the idea of the constituiton question already being decided
quinnox
Dec 2012
#9
When one starts in fictional territory indeed all things are possible
ProgressiveProfessor
Dec 2012
#12
Then I guess we'd better start nominating SC justices that are on our side. Change the
CTyankee
Dec 2012
#48
One small difference being guns are an enumerated Constitutional right.
Common Sense Party
Dec 2012
#77
Ah stricter gun control means confiscation of most guns. Glad you have clarified that.
dkf
Dec 2012
#60
You can build your own ARs with unregistered receivers and there is no Federal requirement to
ProgressiveProfessor
Dec 2012
#27
And you guys tell us gun lovers are "law-abiding and responsible." Apparently, you don't even
Hoyt
Dec 2012
#36
So you are saying "self defense in my home" would not be a valid reason? Or target shooting?
Logical
Dec 2012
#37
I think your collection of the current 300 million guns might be harder than you think.....
Logical
Dec 2012
#47
No way they could take guns and not compensate the owner for fair market value.
Logical
Dec 2012
#72
People are not being realistic at this point. How has removing all illegal drugs worked?
Logical
Dec 2012
#92
We have a couple rifles which we need when predators are going after our hens.
peacebird
Dec 2012
#57
I strongly dislike guns, but even more so, the idea that the populace would be unarmed and not the
Fire Walk With Me
Dec 2012
#94
All I tend to hear is we want to turn the screws to a level that won't be tolerated
TheKentuckian
Dec 2012
#105