Quote:
Originally Posted by nfotiu
I don't see these as good examples of how gun controls could help. They tend to be pre-meditated, and well planned. Even in Canada, with some planning and effort, you could get yourself a weapon capable of killing a bunch of people in a crowd. And also, these events are so statiscally insignificant, they should not be used to set any kind of policy.
So my argument was based on spending resources protecting public places vs. spending it elsewhere. But gun control would take time and money too...
I'm more or less in favor of gun controls, but just think preventing mass shootings are a poor example to point to as an argument for them.
|
I think the role of gun control in the elimination of mass shootings is the removal of gun culture in general. In Canada, you tend to have less of the population owning guns in general because it's just not seen as a fundamental aspect of who we are as a people. Really, if you're the type of person who collects guns as a hobby and is super proud of it, you're generally regarded as a redneck. This tends to be pretty common across countries with stricter gun control laws.
Generally, you can pretty much chalk this up to cultural norms and legislation mirroring each other. If you want to go back to your automotive example, we've generally seen a decrease in drunk-driving since harsher DUI penalties have been implemented. I don't think that's a deterrent effect as much as it is society aligning itself with legislation, or vice-versa.
I think there's also a risk vs. reward argument to be had here if you're going to compare guns to vehicles. Vehicles have a dramatic effect on our quality of life, so in some sense the risks they contain are justified. Please explain to me the net positive effect on quality of life that is gained by the general public having access to handguns and assault rifles.