The following is a 3 message exchange between 2 users
@VulcanMan6 1yr1Y
“Chicago has very strict gun laws and yet the highest gun related crimes”
This is a bad argument, considering anyone in Chicago can simply drive like an hour or two away to a place with completely different laws to access guns...that's the entire point of needing national gun laws, so that someone can't just drive to the next town/state to circumnavigate their own laws. Secondly, you're right: if a criminal really wants a gun, then they will obviously be willing to break laws to get one...so, why not make that as difficult as possible for them? Shouldn't we be making it as actively difficult, annoying, and disincentivizing as we can, as opposed to just...doing nothing or making it easier?
@9B6P92Q1yr1Y
If your argument was true, then the neighboring places with less restrictive gun laws would have just as big a crime problem as Chicago. They don’t.
@VulcanMan6 1yr1Y
First of all, you understand that the population of Chicago alone is like a third of the population of the entire state of Indiana, less than a half hour away, right? You don't think that maybe a city of 2.7 million people will inevitably have more crimes than some rural town with a gun show? Moreover, there still are mass shootings in smaller towns too, it's not like only major cities have them, not to mention that "gun laws" are absolutely not the only, or even most significant, factor of general crime. It's simply a fact that if strict laws apply to one place, and not another, then people can and will go to that other place to do those things, which is why we need national laws for these things...
