what do gun laws do?

Gun laws don't prevent crime, but they deter honest people from wrongdoing and ideally define the consequences for those that would break the law. It's a broken system by and large though because the focus these days is all about creating new more restrictive laws that keep guns out of the hands of good people instead of enforcing laws that are already on the books and punishing criminals. Chicago is one of the most restrictive jurisdictions for legal gun ownership and especially concealed carry permits, and yet gun violence rages there.

It's a complex topic, many facets involved. I think some gun laws are needed, and some are just prohibitive to legal ownership of guns by law abiding citizens.

Nothing

I want to address why crime in Japan is low in comparison to the US.

There are a number of factors why Japan has among the lowest numbers of crime, including gun violence.

the first factor is the most important: culture. the Japanese have a culture of cooperation and contentment due to the density of their population and religious influence. They cannot afford to act in extreme illegality lest it harm a very great number of people. Also, they do not have as many impoverished as Americans do. Lastly, there is far less social and racial tension between ethnic groups as Japan remains among the most homogeneous. This is most evidently shown by the fact that after the Tsunami, I believe in 2011, there were no looting.

The US is the exact opposite.

Now imagine if US have the Japanese mentality?

Japan has a different culture, I'll give you that.

But what about these other countries? They've all got different cultures, too. Somehow they all got their gun problem under control.

Are Americans just 3-5x more inherently violent and murderous than everyone else in the rich world? I don't believe that. And anyone who believes in our country shouldn't believe that, either.

So it is 0.003199%?
Am I reading this correct that it is less than 1/3 of 1/1000th of a percent?

You could say it that way. Or: you could say it as 14,000 Americans murdered by guns per year. 40,000 per year if you include suicides using firearms. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/18/us/gun-deaths.html

Any way you slice it, it's a lot of men, women, and children that could be saved if we got our gun death rate down close to other rich-world nations.

Whatever makes those statistics more palatable to you.

Research shows suicide is often a surprisingly impulsive decision, and guns make it easy to act on it. Suicide by gun is more favored by men.

You obviously can’t eliminate every way to kill yourself. Some would kill themselves regardless, of course, but taking away guns from those with suicidal tendencies would save lives.

So my legal ability to be able to protect myself, my family, or anyone else around me, should be hampered to prevent someone from using a specific means to end their own life?

With guns it is easier to kill oneself, but take it away... they will still make that attempt through anyh means possible. Thus, the numbers of suicide will not change.

People choose guns because they want a quick, easy death
But, there are still ways for a wuick easy death

Hm...actually, no, not really. Even 'quick and easy' methods are rather messy when you actually try them. My first example would be hanging. Many people chose that meathod because it seems quick and easy, but in reality it is rather messy and very very painful.

You seem to know a lot about this

I grew up with these kinds of people since I was 9. Of course I would know a lot about it.

Oh yeah

Yup...and well, I dont really have an opinion on this kinda thing, but well, I dont think gun laws will prevent suicide by gun...people can still get their hands on a gun, becuase like 90% of suicidal people dont ever get evaluated.

I get that

One time I thought that by stopping the production of guns we could just be at peace

Then I realized the problem was the people, not the guns

Oh you really are sheltered....

No, if we stopped the production of guns, we would have to destroy all the other guns. That, and the black market is really....well stocked.

I realized
I was stupid, okay?!

Youre not stupid, just sheltered.

Nah, a little logic disproved my thought after that

A quick and easy suicide?

Yeah
Though, suicide is bad, it's a sin, it's taking a life
God stops us, He wants us to find another way than taking our life
That's why it feels so hard to go through with it
People who commit suicide without hesitation have already left God behind

Thank you for your perspective, and Giod certainly do not want us to kill ourselves because He loves us. But I must correct on the motivation behind the purchasing of firearms.

People generally do not buy guns primarily to kill themselves; in fact that's never part of the reasons why they do. Statistically, 1 and 3 Americans owned firearms, and not only that, they have as much as 8 with different types, using different calibres, with the two most common reasons:

1. To defend themselves, their loved ones, and their possessions
2. And to enjoy shooting as a recreation

For more patriotic buyers, they by guns to defend themselves in case their government becomes a tyrannical entity. The 2nd Amendment was written for that purpose.

It was only when they've had difficulties in life is when they entertain the thought of suicide. Even then, it doesn't come naturally to human beings as in scripture, no one really wants to die (Job 2:3-6).

Still, there is certain point where s/he could no longer bear living; the natural, human psychological threshold in fearing death is now crossed and they begin to plan for their death which includes a weapon to carry it out. They lost hope, they believed their problems could never be fixed; they feel worthless. They begin to give away their prized possessions, they no longer have an appitite, and they withdrawl (both physically and emotionally). They write their last will or words, explaining why they decided to end their lives , Then they take the final step.

That is because the US has 3x the population.

The total population of Britain is 66 million & Canada has 37 million; France has 66 million & Germany has 82 million. Finally, Japan has 104 million, while the US has 327 million people.

Source
Population, total. The World Bank https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL

It’s murder-per-capita (/100,000) so population differences are already accounted for

I see; thank you for pointing that out. And I apologize for this late response.

To that, if guns are as regulated in America as Japan, then i wager that the violent crime rate would not decline. Gun are the most effective means of killing, but it is by no means the most destructive and frightening.

A knife is an extremely simple tool and yet can almost be just as lethal and scary. Here's why.

Due to its simplicity, it can be made cheaply. A handgun on average cost roughly $500 to a knife that can be purchased at maybe $7. Or take any crap metal that can be found almost anywhere and sharpen it to a fine edge.

It is much smaller, much lighter in weight, and have a naturally thin profile which means it far easier conceal than comparatively bulky, 3-5 pound handgun .

Unlike a handgun you cannot hear it when used, except the gasp, screams, cries, and moans of the victim.

You do not have the reach advantage of a gun, but committing a murder is as easy as simply approaching a victim from the front and rear in the dark.

And while the knife is far slower than a bullet, the damage it can inflict is arguably more. WIth a stab, if you pull it it will cause more damage because the flesh bonds to the blade so if you pull out you would cause more damage. The bullet in comparison, depending on what type, simply passes through.

Now with a cut, it's damage depends on depth. the deeper it goes, the more damage it inflict, as well as lethality.

And in speaking of lethality, the lethality of the bullet depends entirely on what's called "Shot Placement". If a bullet hits anywhere on the arms and legs it is generally non-lethal unless it severs an artary. Where it is lethal is the head, neck, and chest area.

With the knife it is almost a reverse (depending on the depth and angle of the cut). Anywhere in the body where there is an artery which are above the hand, the knees, anywhere on the neck, and the stomach. Obviously the chest area is better protected, but a stab in that area is almost always lethal.

Medically, you can plug up a gunshot wound with a gauze patches; but with a deep cut you need a lot more of it depemding on length. And again you cannot pull out the knife, you just have to wrap gauze around it as only the surgeons can free the blade and place a cup with the right measurement over the knife so that it is better protected from bumps.

A little more information for you.

I'll concede this: you cannot commit mass murder with a knife as much as you can with a gun, unless you have a sword, and your victims are cornered in a room. However, there are other ways of committing mass murder.

I forgot to say that to stop the bleeding from either a gunshot wound or a cut, the bandage not only needs to be applied but apply pressure on the wound until it stops bleeding. Please take a First Aid Class,

Now, most violent crime occurs mostly in urban settings, in poor neighborhoods. It does not equally apply everywhere. As said before, America is the reverse of Japan. In those poor American neighborhoods you have children who are typically raised in single parent homes. Homes without a father/mother-figure and the mother often has very little time to teach her children with care as she has to work two jobs to make ends meet. Some kids have it worse: a parent or parents struggling with drugs and alcohol addiction, and/or are abusive to their child(ren).

So without a parental figure, they have to look elsewhere for guidence and belonging, and that when the gangs fill-in the void. Even if they don't join gangs, a child without a father/mother-figure is 10x more likely to commit a crime. In that environment a destructive cycle begins which is hard to break. With that, crime will likely to continue with the next generation if not intervened.

As for the rest, the culture the Japanese had does not apply. Since the 1960's and 70's the family unit broke down. Divorce is becoming more and more common which results in single parent homes or homes with disfunctional families. That's not the universal norm as it depends entirely on how children cope with losing their biological father or mother, but the loss tended to be traumatic. The statistical 1 in 10 also applies here. So you can imagine what can result from that environment.

the level of gun violence is not dependent on how many guns are on the street but the affected people. You can say that there will be less deaths as a result of a reduction of firearms ownership, but that will be made up for with the easy availability of knives. And if you think they too can be regulated, then ask the prison guards about the many "Shankings" as inmates can produce knives from what they can find.

Yes

America is full of savages

No like really

Oh. We have the retarded liberals. You have no right to speak you baby-slaughtering, terrorist-supporting Democrat swine. Get out of here. Jump a bridge. Go away.

I think we have to at least listen to him. Pushing him away just for his beliefs seems unfair. What if he has a point?

Never listen to libtards

But Jack Wilson is not a victim.

The reason there's so many shootings in places like California is because they are liberal states that put serious firearm restrictions so that no one has guns and the terrorists can just walk in and slaughter hundreds of people. This is the true story. Don't listen to Kylie_Fan_89.

Don't ask Chicago, ask Japan or any of these other countries that actually have comprehensive, nationwide gun control and not a patchwork of totally inconsistent local laws which can be flouted at ease because our country is awash in an estimated 393 million guns

Fun fact: we have 46 percent of the world's guns right here in America

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_ownership

Attacking Wikipedia and then citing a trash source like Gunfacts.info. Lol. Wikipedia and the sources it relies upon are definitely more reliable

Gunfacts.info homepage announces its agenda right up front: “debunking common myths about gun control.” They’re seeking to change a narrative. Does that sound impartial to you?

You also haven’t shown me, specifically, how anything about my chart was wrong. You just vaguely impugned my source.

But okay, here is another chart comparing gun murder rates. It’s from the U.N. and was republished by the Washington Post.

If you have some sort of problem with this source, and I expect you will (U.N.! Scary!), then I’ll I’ll find you another chart. I can find charts like this with relative ease. Why? The underlying data is accurate and therefore appears in multiple sources.

Oh no! The UN! So unreliaaableeee

I agree that Wikipedia is actually a good source. Though it can be edited by anyone it is still responsibly moderated.

I think it is referred to as an echo chamber. Like most media outlets these days, just re-reporting what someone else has reported with the caveat of "sources report...."

Here’s another chart with data from the American Journal of Medicine. I’d love to see them attack that source.

I think Japan and Korea have zero shooting deaths because we (Asians) have very different cultures. The East and the West oftentimes have aspects that are complete opposites of each other, and some of those aspects are our cultural aspects.

I think most of these are the cause of American culture, which oftentimes takes things way too lightly than they should

Some charts include suicides, some don't. If it says "gun homicides," then it's excluding suicides (and probably other firearm fatalities whose cause could not exactly be determined).

"Gun deaths" includes everything.