Gun Control Question?

[Toimu]

I just don't understand something. If you took all guns away, the only self defence would be physical. The average person to be a victim of a violent crime in the US is a small women, or the elderly. The average person to commit a violent crime in the US is a male between 18-35 years old, 5'6"- 6'0", and 150-190 lbs. (I'm guessing on the numbers, but it's close to this last I heard. I couldn't find the numbers, would love to see them if someone has a link.) Basicly, a criminal picks someone they can over power.

But how many people would break into a home, rob/rape someone, if 100% of the law abiding population not only carried/owned guns, but also went to the gun range often?

http://www.canoe.ca/CNEWSLaw0112/18_vio-cp.html

Canadian criminals are more likely to steal cars, burn buildings and commit break-ins than are their American counterparts, a Statistics Canada study indicates.

U.S. lawbreakers are more likely to commit homicide, assault and robbery, says the study comparing crime rates between the two countries between 1980 and 2000.

Why is this? Canada has more gun laws than US right?

http://www.monitor.net/rachel/r551.html

TOXICS AND VIOLENT CRIME

Pollution causes people to commit violent crimes --homicide, aggravated assault, sexual assault and robbery --according to new research by Roger D. Masters and co-workers at Dartmouth College.[1] Sociologists have known for a long time that violent crimes occur more in some places than in others. Some U.S. counties have only 100 violent crimes per 100,000 people per year; other counties have rates of violent crime that are 30 times as high. The question is why some places have high crime rates and others don't. Masters says pollution is part of the answer.

Can this be true?

I just want to hear what anti-gun people think. How would taken guns away from law abiding citizens make criminals stop commiting violent crimes? Criminals don't obay the law! So do you think/know that people commit violent crimes do it without thinking, (spur of the moment), and wouldn't if they didn't have a gun?

What if guns never existed? What would stop a criminal (or a group of criminals) from attacking a person weaker than them? Swords? Axes? Knifes? Other weapons? Well, what if those didn't existed either? What can be used for good, can also be used for bad. Then there would only be martial arts. Once again, what be used for good, can also be used for bad. So out law martial arts. Then you still have who is just stronger or largest number of people to worry about. How would you solve that? Personal gaurds issued by the government? How many violent crimes happen in maxium security prisons? (Most of these have been done in the past by rulers or governments)

What about a test to see if someone is violent? How would you test someone to see if they are violent? Do we have the technology to tell if someones' DNA or pollution intake will make them violent?

Just what good will taking guns away from law abiding citizans do?

I personally think increasing the punisment is the only way to reduce crime. Cut off someones hand for stealing. Execute them for murder. Bring Caining (sp?) into the US. etc...