How come gun control doesnt work?

You forgot The U.S.A. Oh! sorry I forgot, every one in the U.S.A. has the right to bear arms / armories !?. Sure it's Dead safe over there. Yet they talk about weapons of mass destruction. War is on the agenda, when was it ever otherwise. The mind boggles.

Your premise is incorrect. Gun controls work. Most developed countries have very low gun crime rates compared to the US.

in america guns are legal and thats why they have such a high murder rate so gun control works dear Chris S i dont know what uve been reading but in the UK crime has gone down considarably since 1992 and its last major peak in 1996, guess what happened in 1996 ALL handguns were banned in the UK under any circumstances apart from police etc. because of the Dunblane massacre. The worst areas of gun crime in the UK are not in London they are in Birmingham city centre where on average there is a gun crime or shooting i forget which every day. i dont know much about american crime but seing as the person who carried out the Virginia Tech massacre bought his guns legally i dont think the gun crime in the US is from ileegal guns especially not in rural areas. oh yeah and a large proportion of your crime stems from guns, if guns were legal here as they are over there wed be screwed, we have someone stabbed every half hour in england and wales, if we had guns wed be like you and have 2.7% of our youth fatalities caused by guns (or more)

N. Cognito is succinct and correct. Very little to add. The vast increase in gun related crime is inversely proportional to Registered Firearm ownership over the last 10 years in the U.K.

Because the only people who obey gun control laws are the ones that wouldn't commit crimes anyway. Only a tiny fraction of all gun crimes are committed with legal guns. Richard

Because criminals do not care if guns are legal or not. Outlaw guns and only outlaws will have guns.

1. Many of the examples you cite aren't really examples of gun *control* because although laws are in place to restrict gun ownership, they are not enforced. Serra Leone was a battleground a few years ago. It's hardly fair to expect them to be back to the standard of a western country. 2. Many of the examples you give are countries lacking effective policing - they are third world countries, some unstable ones. 3. Switzerland. It's widely believed that Switzerland is a heavily armed society. That isn't entirely true. Most adult male Swiss are members of the country's civilian army. Although they have firearms and are trained to use them, they are kept locked away, and ammunition is not generally kept with them. Their weapons aren't for "self defence" but for national defence. 4. You ignore that the most infamously anti-gun control country in the world, the USA, has much higher rates of crime, and particularly very serious crimes, such as murder and rape, than developed countries you cite such as Germany and Japan. 5. Fairly obviously, gun control does not work in countries where the police can't control crime anyway. In developed countries it seems that those with gun controls are generally safer, especially in terms of murder.

Britain Backfire. "A litany of failures were apparent as early as the year 2000, when CBS news reported that law and order in Britain was deteriorating at a rapid rate, while the country was experiencing a crime surge much more severe than any recorded in the U.S." "use of handguns to commit crimes rose 40% two years following the total ban on guns." "In 2002, the chance of being mugged in London was approx. 6 times greater than in New York City, NY." (which as strict gun control as well). “In fact, the motherland was indeed racing ahead by a substantial lead, sporting a crime rate in England and Wales that at times peaked at as much as 60% above the crime stats here in the U.S., with gun crimes being especially prominent?” Lantz, Gary (2/2008), Backfire in Britain, American's 1st Freedom, Feb 2008, p27 and 28 I got this from another answerer on Y!A This is a post from an Australian police officer... Hi Yanks, I thought you all would like to see the now available data from Down Under. It has now been one year (12 months) since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now available: -Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent; -Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 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 as compared with the last one year period when private ownership of a firearm was legal. (NB: the law-abiding citizens did turn in their personal firearms, the criminal element did not and thus criminals in Australia still possess their guns.) -While data for the 25 years preceding the confiscation of privately owned guns showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months as criminals now are assured their victims will be unarmed. -There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home. 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.' -This story of well intentioned government intervention in the rights of lawful individuals to own and possess firearms won't be seen in the mainstream US media or on the American evening news. Senator Obama who advocates a similar confiscation in the US will not be reporting any of this to you. But, the Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens. Americans may want to take note before it's too late! http://www.gunowners.org/hlr-au.htm I have a story. In land far, far away where King Richard rules over all of the Land of Lincoln it was instituted that as of Nineteen Hundred and Eighty-Two no one shalt have handguns in Chicago city limits....Since then it has been a city ordinance and the funny thing is Chicago just took over as city with the most murder in the US. http://cbs2chicago.com/local/murder.rate.Chicago.2.893791.html Someone was saying it works? Show me the proof. Crimianls will not obey gun laws.

Gun control has to be an absolute issue. If you want to ban guns completely, then no one should have access to any. Otherwise, someone is going to be on the other side of the barrel and insists that he also should possess a gun for self defense, and it all starts all over again. I think that the ban on guns is just as difficult as the ban on smoking if not more difficult. Not because of our dependency on guns (and smoking) but because the great industrial giants behind both commodities have invested billions in these two trades and they are raking in imaginary figures in revenues. They are not ready to relinquish their posts yet.