Answer:
Use these top three arguments the next time you are asked to defend the need for gun control.
01
of 03
Gun Ownership Leads to Homicides
gun control rally
Protesters with One Million Moms for Gun Control, a gun control group formed in the wake of the Newtown, Connecticut massacre, rally in New York City. Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Gun-rights advocates and other extremists sometimes behave as if every attempt to create sane and logical regulations on guns is a fruitless, fascist assault on their freedom, but a quick look at the facts shows a chilling relationship between homicides and gun ownership that shouldn't be so carelessly ignored. The more people that own guns in a region, the more firearm deaths that area will see.
According to a study on this very topic published in the American Journal of Public Health, "For each percentage point increase in gun ownership, the firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9%," (Siegel 2013). This study, which looked at data from three decades for every U.S. state, strongly suggests that the more people that own guns, the more lives will be taken by guns.02
of 03
Fewer Guns Means Fewer Gun Crimes
In the same vein, research shows that gun control restricting household firearm ownership could save lives. Gun control is therefore not only logical, it's necessary.
It's common for gun advocates to claim that the solution to gun violence is to be more heavily armed so that you can defend yourself and others against someone brandishing a weapon. This view is echoed by the popular saying, "The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun."
But again, this argument contains no logic. Other countries that have implemented stricter gun ownership regulations than the U.S. have lower homicide rates, and this is no coincidence. Looking at the example that Japan, with its strict firearm control laws and its almost nonexistent national homicide rate, sets, it's clear that fewer guns, not more guns, is the obvious answer ("Japan—Gun Facts, Figures and the Law").03
of 03
You Do NOT Have the Right to Own Any Gun You Want
The Supreme Court ruled in McDonald v. Chicago (2010), a case often cited by gun-rights advocates, that private citizens may own weapons for self-defense but are subject to restrictions on those weapons. Therefore, it's not your right to build and own a nuclear or assault weapon, nor is toting a pistol in your pocket an unfettered natural right. Your right to bear arms is maintained by federal law, but it's not as loose as you might think.
Minors can't buy alcohol and we can't purchase cold medicine right off the shelf because our society aims to protect citizens from drug abuse and trafficking. In the same way, we need to regulate guns even further in order to protect Americans from gun violence. It's inaccurate to claim that unrestricted gun access and ownership is or ever was a constitutional right.