I think people issue is the prevalence of guns as well as how easy it is for danger and/or mentally ill people can get them.
Most Americans are for background checks, that doesn't get put into law because the nra are a huge and powerful lobby.
I'm Canadian & despite what people think there are a lot of gun owners, we do hunt a lot, but you actually have to get a background check & mental fitness test before you can own a gun. Making it hard to get guns for people who shouldn't have them in the first place is common sense, & Canada's super low gun crimes are proof. Also look at how well gun control worked for Australia. Why Americans try to deny these facts makes no sense to me. Sorry for the long post.
Last time I checked we still have NICS and if you conceal carry in most states you've had an FBI background check. Also just because you take away guns you're not stopping crimes and murders, you're just changing the means for someone who is commited to kill.
I dont think the areas around chicago have such high gun control, so it kinda defeats the gun control laws. That being said, the ease of aquiring black market guns in america would have a similar effect.
As for how removing guns doesn't prevent people from trying to kill, you have to get a lot closer to use a knife or other such weapon, and they're not as easy to kill instantly with most of the time. As such, while the number of people trying to murder would likely be about the same, the simplicity and ease of those murders would be at least slightly reduced.
The people who kill people are already twisted enough to do that. Many of them already do illegal things such as drugs, and making a law that says they can't own guns doesn't suddenly make them follow the law.
That may be true, but if the prevalence of guns is reduced as a result of introducing new gun control laws, then the likelihood of a shooting will also be reduced.
The media does do this. They announce a shooting, briefly name the shooter, then talk about gun control. Maybe they're focusing on the wrong issue. Maybe instead of talking about how we should make gun laws strict, they should be discussing what drove a person to commit such a shooting. Maybe they should promote anti-bullying and how important it is to treat people fairly instead of the badness of guns.
Sure you've got the right idea, focus on people who are mentally ill enough to shoot up a school and kill children. But that doesn't change the fact that whether we help that person or not they will still LEGALLY purchase a gun. So should we focus on this persons mental status or the laws that are allowing these people to own weapons?
Alright. The cops are there, the dude who got shot and is barely alive there, the shooter with the gun in his hand is alive in there. The cops grab the gun and start shouting at why it shot the victim, the victim mongers something like "oh but he shouldn't have shot me" and the cops are like "WE'll get to that"
Most Americans are for background checks, that doesn't get put into law because the nra are a huge and powerful lobby.
I'm Canadian & despite what people think there are a lot of gun owners, we do hunt a lot, but you actually have to get a background check & mental fitness test before you can own a gun. Making it hard to get guns for people who shouldn't have them in the first place is common sense, & Canada's super low gun crimes are proof. Also look at how well gun control worked for Australia. Why Americans try to deny these facts makes no sense to me. Sorry for the long post.