July 27th, 2012
04:33 PM ET

Time to face facts on gun control

By Fareed Zakaria

It has now been just over a week since a lone gunman opened fire on moviegoers in Aurora, Colorado. The airwaves have been dominated by soul searching.

Most of the pundits have concluded that the main cause of this calamity is the dark, strange behavior of the gunman. Talking about anything else, they say, is silly. The New York Times’ usually extremely wise columnist, David Brooks, explains that this is a problem of psychology, not sociology.

At one level, this makes sense, of course, as the proximate cause. But really, it’s questionable analysis. Think about this: are there more lonely people in America compared with other countries? Are there, say, fewer depressed people in Asia and Europe? So why do they all have so much less gun violence than we do?

The United States stands out from the rest of the world not because it has more nutcases – I think we can assume that those people are sprinkled throughout every society equally –but because it has more guns.

Look at the map below. It shows the average number of firearms per 100 people. Most of the world is shaded light green – those are the countries where there are between zero and 10 guns per 100 citizens. In dark brown, you have the countries with more than 70 guns per 100 people. The U.S. is the only country in that category. In fact, the last global Small Arms Survey showed there are 88 guns for every 100 Americans. Yemen is second at 54. Serbia and Iraq are among the other countries in the top 10.

We have 5 percent of the world's population and 50 percent of the guns.

But the sheer number of guns isn’t an isolated statistic. The data shows we compare badly on fatalities, too.  The U.S has three gun homicides per 100,000 people. That’s four times as many as Switzerland, ten times as many as India, 20 times as many as Australia and England.

Whatever you think of gun rights and gun control, the numbers don’t flatter America.

I saw an interesting graph in The Atlantic magazine recently. A spectrum shows the number of gun-related deaths by state. Now if you add one more piece of data – gun control restrictions – you see that the states with at least one firearm law (such as an assault weapons ban or trigger locks) tend to be the states with fewer gun-related deaths.

Conclusion? Well, there are lots of factors involved, but there is at least a correlation between tighter laws and fewer gun-related deaths.

I've shown you data comparing countries, and comparing states. Now consider the U.S. over time. Americans tend to think the U.S. is getting more violent. In a recent Gallup survey, 68 percent said there’s more crime in the U.S. than there was a year ago. Well, here’s what I found surprising: the U.S. is actually getting safer. In the decade since the year 2000, violent crime rates fell by 20 percent; aggravated assault by 22 percent; motor vehicle theft by 42 percent; murder – by all weapons – by 13 percent.

But guns are the exception. Gun homicide rates haven’t improved at all. They were at roughly the same levels in 2009 as they were in 2000. Meanwhile, serious but non-fatal gun injuries caused during assault have actually increased in the last decade by 20 percent, as guns laws have gotten looser and getting automatic weapons has become easier.

We are the world’s most heavily-armed civilian population. One out of every three Americans knows someone who has been shot.

Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion, but not to his or her own facts. Saying that this is all a matter of psychology is a recipe for doing nothing. We cannot change the tortured psychology of madmen like James Holmes. What we can do is change our gun laws.

Should U.S. gun laws be tougher? What would you change?


soundoff (2,981 Responses)
  1. chris

    Fareed, you should have done some research before starting your opinion piece with the assumption that the US does not have more nutcases per captica than other countries. There are plenty of studies to the contrary. You should've done some investigating and at least acknoweldged these findings. (and no, don't ask me to post links for all of it. Do some research on your own.)

    July 29, 2012 at 9:33 am | Reply
  2. chefdugan

    Why do they let this arab try to tell us what Americans think? Let's imagine that Congress passsed a law today that outlaws guns. Just how many Americans would willingly go to their local police station and hand over their $500 handgun, or rifle, or shotgun? I know for sure they would have to get a lot smarter than they are to find mine!

    July 29, 2012 at 9:36 am | Reply
  3. Jsmith

    @Tom, who wrote: "Wrong friend. The military version of the AR-15 has two selectable modes, full auto and semi-auto. The civilian version is semi-auto only and cannot be modified for full auto."

    Has not been true for years. The current M16 has three modes - safe, single fire, and triple fire. There are no more full-auto M16s.

    That said, the logic of the gun-ban crowd astounds me. The premise seems to be that criminals will obey gun control laws. More likely they will not.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:36 am | Reply
  4. Joe

    Fareed, please google the 2nd admendment and read it. Our right to keep and bear arms was not for those who hunt turkey's. The American people are getting stupid and the new generation does expect the goverment to take care of them like their mommies and daddies, but 70 million Americans are still awake. Maybe in another 20 or 30 years people will be stupid enough to allow the goverment to totally control them, but for now those that own firearms legally understand that it is our right to protect ourselves from tyranny, not to get food.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:37 am | Reply
  5. vet4life63

    Over the last 70 years, Europe has averaged about 400,000 murders per year, when one includes the murders committed by governments against mostly unarmed people. That murder rate is about 16 times higher than the murder rate in the U.S. Why hasn’t the United States experienced this kind of government oppression? Many reasons could be cited, but the Founding Fathers indicated that an armed populace was the best way of preventing official brutality.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:40 am | Reply
    • T-Roy

      Hey Genius make sure you don't include World War II in the great 400k murders in the past 70 years in Europe bit...

      July 29, 2012 at 9:52 am | Reply
      • vet4life63

        WW II stats are not included. if they were the total would be much higher However Hitlers killing of the Jewish people after disarming them is. World wide the figure is in the millions. Yes that's right. Most due to Democide. In nearly every case, the people were disarmed by the Govt first. The current death toll due to this world wide and excluding wars is 262 million.

        July 29, 2012 at 12:21 pm |
  6. Keith

    Please look into the comparisons between James Holmes and famous spree killer Charles Whitman. Both of them hoarded lots of guns and weapons and ammunition. Both were considered intelligent white males. Both kept journals. Both opened fire in public and killed and wounded many people. Charles Whitman died during his crime spree and in his suicide note he wrote that he wanted an autopsy. An autopsy was done and it was discovered that Whitman had a brain tumor. The most common and aggressive form of cancer. And it was in the area of the brain that controlled emotions and many people who had a tumor in this part of the brain also had obsessed urges to write. As in keeping a journal. Both of them were seeing a psychiatrist and both showed signs of premeditation. PLEASE look into the comparisons between the two cases. An MRI should be done on James Holmes to see if he too has a brain tumor that could explain the reason behind this senseles tragedy. There is a ton of info at google, wikipedia and youtube regarding Charles Whitman.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:40 am | Reply
    • ForGoodOfAll

      interesting point, Keith. I agree that the killer should have a brain scan.

      July 29, 2012 at 1:55 pm | Reply
  7. Peteyroo

    Cars kill more people than guns do. Shall we get rid of cars?

    July 29, 2012 at 9:41 am | Reply
  8. JB

    Guns are the problem really? A crazy person uses a gun to kill a dozen innocents and we question the ability of him to get a gun??? with that logic you have to ask.. .How many people are killed and how many families are destroyed by drunk drivers every year?? So, what do we ?? implement tougher laws to make it harder to drive a car?? tougher laws to get alcohol??? wake up please.. This country was founded by the will of the people and the barrel of a gun... Stricter control will only increase the number of illegal guns.. and illegal guns usually end up in the hands of the "illegals" who dont' place too much value on human life anyway....

    July 29, 2012 at 9:42 am | Reply
  9. Take A Number

    "I think we can assume that those people are sprinkled throughout every society equally –but because it has more guns". You know what happens when you assume. I would like to know how you arrived at the stat's on your map, unless you asked every person in every country if they own a gun you are only advancing a theory which is also an assumption. One might advance the theory,Mexico along with other countries where it is illegal to own firearms have lied to you.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:42 am | Reply
  10. Tommy Jones

    Okay, lets think about it for a min. All people who are saying that if we allow all people to carry guns then someone could have shot down Holmes that night? Right?

    So, what's the plan?...from now onwards then ALL 300 Million Americans will start carrying guns and AK-47 rfiles to grocery stores, movies, coffee shops, barber shops, salons, nails...

    That will be so easy to implement. How about high school teens...there were murders in Columbine...So...that means we will now allow all 5-18 year olds to carry compact guns (or maybe rifles) in their backpacks....IT MAKES TOTAL SENSE

    COOL, that makes a lot of sense!!!!

    July 29, 2012 at 9:42 am | Reply
    • Joe

      About as much sense as disarming the law abiding citizen and criminals will give up their weapons.

      July 29, 2012 at 9:49 am | Reply
  11. merchantsdowneast

    Here is a letter to American citizens from an Australian police chief after gun laws went into effect in Australia...bottom line only criminals have guns!
    From: Ed Chenel, A police officer in Australia
    Hi Yanks, I thought you all would like to see the real
    figures from Down Under.
    It has now been 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 in:
    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
    lone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that
    while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not
    and criminals still possess their guns!)
    While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady
    decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically
    upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed
    that their prey is 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....' You
    won't see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or
    members of the State Assembly disseminating this information.
    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.
    Take note Americans, before it's too late!
    Will you be one of the sheeple to turn yours in?
    WHY? You will need it.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:42 am | Reply
    • palusko996769

      The question you should be asking is: how many people were killed by guns before the law went into effect? Let me guess... it was much less than in the USA. So the follow up question is: why is there so much gun crime in the USA as opposed to other countries. Clearly, there's something very wrong here, don't you think?

      July 29, 2012 at 9:57 am | Reply
  12. darmock

    Interesting observations. I must say having lived in several different countries (Canada, UK, and the US) that I actually feel safer in the US than elsewhere! In the UK and Canada where gun ownership is not a right and is highly regulated you cannot use a gun to ever defend yourself or your family else you would see more jail time then the original person trying to harm you unless they had a gun. There have been a couple of instances where multiple people have performed a home invasion (think gang) in Canada where the resident killed one with a shotgun and he wen to jail for 20 years. The judge ruled that the homeowner did not have the right to defend themselves with a firearm even with multiple assailants. If you get a permit to own a handgun in Canada It can only be conveyed between your house and the gun range AFTER obtaining a conveyance permit to move it that one time! Thus you have to go the police each time you want to move the handgun. In the UK where lies the origins of the "castle laws" dont ever try to defend your home less the flying squad cart you off to jail. I tired of living abroad and moved back into the US in 2000. I took up residence in El Paso Tx. where the crime rate was lower (at that time) than either of the cities in the UK or Canada I lived in. Once there I went through the requisite training fingerprinting picture taking background checking local/state/federal for a CCW permit. In fact I have been fingerprinted more times coming back to live in the US than all the other places I have lived. I take gun ownership and concealed carry seriously and re-qualify every month (not required) in marksmanship. I also have taken every gun course (tactics, weapon retention, combat, legal, etc) available. I am a regular at our regional simulator also and spend more time there than our local leo's. When I compare our states requirements for a sworn law enforcement officer to the training I undertake lets just say they are kind of lacking. So I assume by the tone of my comments I would be branded a gun nut. I prefer being branded a highly trained and motivated gun nut.

    I suppose in the long run you just have to ask yourself a question do you feel safer protecting yourself or allowing the state to protect you? Who do your fear more the "terrorists" or the government who is eroding your rights all in the name of protecting you? I realize this is not a debate that will go away however the fear and ignorance that is out there and the fear mongering that the government is doing is unacceptable.

    As for a comment on Colorado it is sad when someone goes over the edge and kills. The method of killing seems to be more important to the purveyors of "gun control" not the fact that we have a critical shortage of mental health facilities in this country.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:43 am | Reply
    • palusko996769

      So much gun violence is in Canada again?

      July 29, 2012 at 10:10 am | Reply
  13. Tim

    Gns should be illegal as they are in NY. No guns allowed. period

    July 29, 2012 at 9:44 am | Reply
    • Joe

      Tim, how is that working out for you. NY, Chcago and DC all have the same policy, yet seem to have the same record on vilolent crim. Can you please tell the criminals no guns are allowed in NY so your cities will stop embarrassing theirselves.

      July 29, 2012 at 9:53 am | Reply
    • Doug

      Firearms are only illegal in NY City. Here the vast majority of gun killings are criminal on criminal shootings. Also simply banning weapons is a basic impossibility, There are 270 million in the country,. How will you collect them all? Millions would still be available and those mainly in the hands of criminals.

      July 29, 2012 at 9:58 am | Reply
  14. austin

    As someone born outside of the United States, I have the impression that Mr. Zakaria has no regard for the unique role of firearms in American history. The reader can study that for himself. I would ask the governments of various countries for their motivation for strict gun control. I'm sure that many would tell you that the idea of allowing the general public to own firearms is utter madness and political suicide. The reason- if you armed certain populations in this world they would immediately forment revolution. That's what governments are ultimately concerned about. As to gun control in the US- I would be all for it if I thought it would cure the depravity of the human heart. That's what we need to address in the United States.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:46 am | Reply
  15. Paul

    I see some statistics you like to parade and champion around and point fingers at gun ownership. 3 in 100K, is this broken down by law enforcement vs civilian ownership? Our police are some of the most armed in the world and becoming more militarized everyday with many having SWAT in full tactical ready, sometime multiple teams. Look at the news and see how many citizens are gunned down my police everyday, it is a shocking number. What about suicides, the number of 3 is reduced to 1.5 if you factor out suicides. You mention gun deaths, but what about "general" violent death rate? It is around 10 per 100K in the US. In the US alone that means 7 out of 100K are being killed with something OTHER than a gun. China is around 30 per 100K! and they have no guns, how are these people being killed? Funny how statistics can be used against you in the same way you use them to promote socialist agenda.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:48 am | Reply
  16. agg7

    America is different. Guns are an inextricable component of our society. We started with guns standing against the King of England. We came together, stood in the gap and took charge. It is clear you don't understand this Fareed. Americans are different. We are not hand wringers. We stand for liberty and freedom here and around the world. We stand in the gap. We get it done. Even now many of us are not asking why Aurora happened. We are asking ourselves: "What will I do if I encounter a demon like Holmes in a public setting to make sure it ends as peacefully and quickly as possible." We are rugged individualists Fareed. We will not stand by and depend upon others to do what we should do for ourselves.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:49 am | Reply
  17. Glenn

    How about this little FACT: The U.S. does not have the worst firearm murder rate — that prize belongs to Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica. In fact, the U.S. is number 28, with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people

    July 29, 2012 at 9:50 am | Reply
  18. idb

    Fareed is completely wrong as usual. Although what he says seems to make sense the facts show something completely different. Yes, there are more gun deaths in the US. However, they are mostly the result of criminals killing each other and attacking law abiding citizens. That there are more shootings in states with "less" gun laws makes sense. Those are the states that suffer from illegals and drug cartels causing crime. Fact is also that those states that allow their law abiding citizens to carry a concealed firearm saw their crime drop dramatically, while those states that are very restrictive actually saw their crime rates drop. One cannot solve crimes from happening by restricting law abiding citizens to defend themselves. You prevent crime by disarming criminals. The latter is lacking. Gun laws are not an answer. In fact, most people don't have a clue as to how many there already are. Fact is also that the world would be a much safer place if citizens in crime riddled countries like the UK, Australia, the Netherlands and many more would be allowed to defend themselves. Instead, they first have to become a victim before the police will do their job. Would you rather prevent a crime from happening by carrying a firearm or become a victim first so the police can try and find the perpetrator afterwards? As for mass shootings, they happen everywhere, included in countries that are very restrictive.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:51 am | Reply
  19. Stan

    In the 2 years after England banned guns, the violent ctime rate increased 40%. The thugs knew they could kick someone's door in and take whatever they wanted without fear of being shot.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:51 am | Reply
  20. obsthetimes

    Good points Fareed, However we have to do this bit by bit.
    Lets start by pointing out how crazy it is to have simi automatic rifles, and 30 round magazines easily available !!?
    How many homes will be attacked by the mexican drug mafia this year? We do not need these dangerous weapons in retail stores.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:51 am | Reply
    • Joe

      The 2nd admendment was NOT written for those that hunt or shoot for fun. This is why we enjoy freedom today. Wake up and stop thinking the goverment is an extension of your parents. How did we get to the point where everyone believes it is the goverments right to feed you, cloth you, house ou and protect you. Wake Up !!

      By the way mcveigh did more damage with fertilizer than anyone has done with a gun.

      July 29, 2012 at 10:00 am | Reply
  21. Pat Reardon

    The US does not have more crazies proportionately than anywhere else??? Send me your social outcasts, your downtrodden, your political agitators, your revolutionaries, your economically marginalized. America was built by the crazies who didn't want to / couldn't effectively do things the way the old money establishment did in their home countries. That was the beauty of emigrating – you could start over in a place without the high barriers to socio-economic mobility. If they were well integrated in their homelands, they wouldn't have benefited from leaving. America works because just because you're crazy doesn't mean you're wrong and we have benefitted from these rejects from the old world whose ways of thinking were unshackled by the dictates of too heavily ordered societies abroad. You're way off on your essential premise here Fareed.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:52 am | Reply
  22. David

    Since this tragic incident happened I don't believe I have seen CNN post anything but anti-gun/gun control op/eds. If they or any of you could direct me to one that shows the supposed unbiased position you would expect from CNN or another news outlet. I wouldn't expect the Dr. to respond to any of the comments in this section but if he does (he would if he was truly an intellect) I would ask him this questions or ask that he attempt to address some points.

    1. The estimated number of firearms in circulation/ownership in the US ranges anywhere from 200 million up to 900 million. By the logic of percentage of gun owners per capita equating to more guns deaths wouldn't the number of gun related violence/accidents be considerably higher? It's not and it's an obvious flaw in the Dr.s logic.

    2. Private gun sales annually go up yet the increase in gun deaths/injuries don't. Why? I thought the Dr. was making the point that more guns equals more deaths/violence.

    3. While the above is true, it is also true that since the 60/70's the percentage of households with firearms has decreased (greatly) yet mass killings have been increasing. It contradicts his and others line of reasoning.

    4. Chicago and at a time D.C. had some of the toughest gun laws on the books yet violent crime (all) increased drastically. If tougher gun laws are the answer then why is this happening?

    5. Why are people obsessing on the "assault" rifle in this particular case when the Aurora Police have been commenting that the assault rifle jammed almost immediately upon firing. It appears that majority of the carnage wasn't done with the rifle at all.

    I believe the Dr. is being intellectually dishonest by picking and choosing the facts that support his stance. I don't expect the Dr. to read or address any of my points because this Op Ed is nothing more than a paycheck to him. But I do find it cowardly of him and all the other writers of published Op Eds to not circle back around to address some of the talking points others have provided based on the writers lazy journalism.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:52 am | Reply
  23. Doug

    @tom The M-16A2 does not have a full auto mode. It features three-round burst and semi auto.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:54 am | Reply
  24. Will

    Why would you compare death due to guns when you've already established that the US has more guns than any other country? I think it's pretty obvious that countries with the most guns are going to have the most murders by guns. Instead of comparing how many deaths by guns we have compared to other countries why not look at what countries have the highest number of homicides and then see how their gun laws compare.

    Guns are an important part of our history. The good and the bad. They are very prominent in our culture. So when someone decides to commit murder, the obvious choice for a tool is generally a gun. However, when someone feels the need to protect oneself, they generally come to the same conclusion. How else could a 100lb house wife protect herself against a 200lb criminal? You can't depend on the police to come save you. The last time I called the police, it took them over 20 minutes to arrive and respond to an incident in front of my house. 20 minutes is an eternity when you are fighting for your life.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:55 am | Reply
    • Pat Reardon

      That would shatter too many preconceived notions about guns. People would be surprised that countries with proportionately fewer guns in circulation have had higher gun crime rates than the US. For example South Africa and Brazil have had single year higher total gun homicides than the US in the 2000s. Guatemala and Columbia have higher percentages of homicides commited with guns than the US. Belarus, Mexico, Costa Rica, Paraguay and Slovakia have higher rates of firearm homicides per 100,000 than the US. (All taken from United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime year 2000).

      July 29, 2012 at 10:08 am | Reply
  25. ForGoodOfAll

    Assault weapons should be for U.S. military only, NOT for the general U.S. population. It is ridiculous and quite scary that assault weapons can be ordered online and shipped to the general population in the U.S. today. The gun laws are severely flawed and way too lenient in America. As a mother and a grandmother, I am very concerned for my loved ones on school and college campuses, malls, workplaces, theatres, restaurants, etc. and anywhere else that a psycho with guns will have a meltdown and start shooting everyone in sight. We MUST review our current gun laws and make ammendments to protect Amercian citizens asap.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:56 am | Reply
    • ForThe GoodOfAll

      If you are that concerned, you should help arm them so they can protect themselves if something bad does happen.

      July 29, 2012 at 6:46 pm | Reply
  26. Aucausin

    The same way it was a myth that tax breaks given to wealthy "job creators" will create jobs, it is a myth that more guns will help keep the innocent safe. If the only thing that can stop a mad gunman is an armed citizen, shouldn't the most heavily armed population be the safest, not the most at risk? It is safe to say that guns do more damage than protection. Most armed citizens do not have the training or the foresight to react to a gunman in a shootout situation. When you combine that with the fact that many of the people behind the mass shootings plan ahead and can have things like bulletproof armor the odds of an armed citizen successfully stopping the murderer is slim. That's not even taking into account how difficult it would be to actually shoot a gunman while you're surrounded by people running and screaming. Outside of a one on one situation with a violent mugger/rapist/murderer guns in public offer little protection.

    July 29, 2012 at 9:59 am | Reply
    • ForGoodOfAll

      excellent post Aucausin! I agree 100%.

      July 29, 2012 at 2:01 pm | Reply
  27. Emil Banks

    Suppose we should get rid of all the cars in the world because of drunken drivers how about religion how many people over the years have been killed the number is in the millions so shall we close all churchs
    We have enough laws enforce the laws

    July 29, 2012 at 10:00 am | Reply
  28. AM.

    Call Holmes a "terrorist" (which he is) and compare how many innocent civilians have died at the hands of terriost in the U.S. vs: other countries in the world and i'll bet the U.S. is still one of the safest places in the world?

    July 29, 2012 at 10:00 am | Reply
  29. Pug

    Right Fareed. The gun did it again.

    July 29, 2012 at 10:01 am | Reply
  30. Mrs. Liberty

    Creative use of statistics, Mr. Zakaria. I am a well educated American (Ph.D.) and when I look at the report you cited you seem to have forgotten to mention many statistics in the appropriate context. I would encourage anyone to look at the Global Study on Homicide (done by the same organization Mr. Zakaria used to find his own statistics) and look at how the U.S. compares in homicide rates by firearm: http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/statistics/crime/global-study-on-homicide-2011.html

    Some interesting tidbits from the study: Only 207 countries participated; S. America had the HIGHEST percent of homicides from firearm followed by Caribbean, Central America and then N. America. Switzerland reported no data from 2005-2010 but in 1998-2004 had a range from 54.7%-86.8% of homicides by firearm. U.S. had around 60% homicides since 2005 and that number has remained flat. The highest (2006) was 10,225 homicides by firearm in the U.S. (Compare that with Columbia's highest year of 16, 979 homicides).

    Perhaps if Zakaria looks more carefully at data and determines how many of the homicides in the U.S. are from illegally obtained firearms I bet he'd find that we are really needing tighter laws on the criminal element in the U.S. (not the law-abiding, intelligent citizens who obtain weapons legally). Of course there will always be a nut case or two who obtain weapons legally and kill people. The same nuts use other means to kill people as well (bombs, drugs, motor vehicles, knives, etc.)

    Bottom Line: Take control over the illegal arms to criminals and leave my right to bear arms alone.

    July 29, 2012 at 10:02 am | Reply
    • Gunowner1259

      Nicely put. We also are close to haveing the most vehicles per capita and definitely a higher death rate, whether by accident or not (2009 over 36K killed). Guess we need stricter laws on the roads since vehicles kill....ooops, they need drivers to do that, just like a gun needs someone to pull the trigger or drop it while loaded.

      July 29, 2012 at 10:19 am | Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.