That isn’t true, but I accept that you think it is. There are countless countries who share borders with better fire arms records than ours. You seem to be implying that all illegal weapons are coming from the southern border. I’ll direct your attention to that border’s actual size. I will also direct your attention the the length and size of the borders aligned to water. I can tell you, because I know smugglers and spend time with them, and because we used to do the same during Prohibition, that the sea is a far easier way to smuggle, because Coast Guard is the least funded agency in the military and their patrols are very regimented.
I’d also like to point out that most gun crimes are committed by legal gun owners who were not properly screened, NOT by illegal guns.
And beginning a conversation with “I love you, but I think your idea is rubbish” is a logical fallacy. You can disagree with me without it having anything to do with how you feel about me.
“I agree with you on most things, but” is a better way of beginning, for if your affection for me is based entirely on agreeing with me then perhaps that is a shallow and insular definition of friendship?
I’ll leave that distinction to you
I should also mention, that the only criminal gun-running on which the FBI or DEA of ATF can report on, is the sort that is captured. The efficient gun smugglers don’t get caught, and their operations do not get recorded as statistics.
But again, that is beside the point, since the vast majority of gun crimes in America are committed with legally obtained firearms. The question isn’t criminality. It is what is legality? In Japan, legality is formed by rigorous testing. You have to REALLY desire that gun to jump through all the hoops. This is a natural selection gradient for anyone who just wants to kill a large group of people, hence, it’s a deterrent. It also has the additional distinction of making certain that everyone carrying a firearm is fit to do so. You are not fit, contrary to American ideology, just because you exist. I’m sorry, that’s lunacy. My blind editor could purchase a gun and legally carry it. She’s blind. Is that safe? No. So why is it legal? Because she has a “right” to own a gun, even though she has no safe way of using it?
Come now. Ideology has to have practical application. I’m sorry, that’s just true, and all the arguments about why people should be allowed to have guns with less restrictions are absolute rubbish.
The fact is…guns are not an adequate tool of rebellion anymore. That precept of the men who wrote the Constitution, and please don’t forget I was alive then, is undone. Outdated. Stupid in the face of the modern era.
That’s the way it is. Less guns, mean less gun crime. Period. More qualified gun handlers mean less gun crime. And so on. Simple math.