A world without guns

[Dizle]

Good point DropKick Murphys. If just one criminal somehow got hold of a police officers gun when the guns are only restricted to police officers, they would know they would have no problem robbing someone.

I voted no because guns are needed for law enforcement. Also, to think realistically, if gun control becomes more effective, criminals will still find a way to get the guns because at least 3/4 of them got them illegally.

 

[Safari So Good]

The U.S. surely needs their guns. A sword war we'd surely lose. China would conquer the world. Wars would be won by those with the biggest population.

But then again you only said without guns, so bombs and etc. would still be a factor preventing nothing. People would stand up more for themselves and there would be more chaos and riots due to the fact that there is no fear of a gun taking them down.

 

[Try and run]

Not really, we still have bombs, knives, and poison. Plus the police department would be pretty defenseless against criminals, so no one would really be afraid of the law. Plus it would be a pain in the ass to kill animals for food.

 

[kovyrulesall]

cops wouldnt be to bad lol,
i dont think criminals would be too worried lol
i think the world needs GUNS !

 

[fudge cakes]

no because there would be more crimes

 

[Apple_Tree]

Yes,ofcourse,but the (terrors) can still make deadly weapons of other stuff

 

[Necromancer24]

@Apple tree: And risk killing themselves? That is a stupid thing to do.

Well, the public could be allowed to have guns, but they must be approved by the government to not go trigger-happy or something.

Basically, if a man comes home and finds his wife in bed with another man, he will most likely take his gun and blow them both away right? Thats the down-side.

But if a man and his wife is held hostage, the man could use the gun to defend himself.

So you see... There's good sides and bad sides to everything.