Gun control is not an effective way to reduce crime, many studies have proven that more gun control increases the crime rate.
“In 1976 D.C. implemented a law that banned citizens from owning guns, as only police were allowed to carry firearms. Those who already owned guns were allowed to keep them only if they were disassembled or trigger-locked. Trigger locks could only be removed if the owner received permission from the D.C. police, which was rare.” D.C. still has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, and consequently is one of the most dangerous places in the county to live, but the facts clearly show that the homicides in D.C. rese after the ban was implemented and then subsequently declined after the Supreme Court ruled the law unconstitutional.
In D.C. homicides rose from 188 in 1976 to
…show more content…
If have ewer gun restrictions causes more violent crime, why would many states with the lowest homicide rates also have relatively few gun control laws. The data also shows there is no connection to higher gun ownership and greater amounts of crime. There are only 6 states in which 50% of household own firearms. If gun-control supporters are correct about the dangers of guns, these states should have significantly higher crime rates, but the opposite is true.
Data provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show four of those six states ranked in the top half of all states for having the lowest homicide rates. Two of the states ranked in the top 6. Further, many cities with very low legal gun ownership rates and stringent gun-control laws, such as Chicago have extremely high gun-related murder rates. Gun-control laws also don’t prevent mass shooting. An analysis conducted by statistician Leah Libresco shows Australia and Britain have not experienced fewer mass shootings since enacting their very strict gun-control