As is always ignored, but needs to be heard:
Increase in gun ownership means decrease in gun crime, because the vast majority of people are good.

Stelfox, please point me towards some research or statistics to support your claim.

Thanks.

A good analysis of this can be found in a publication by John Lott, a senior research scientist, titled 'More guns, Less Crime':

Read it for free here:

http://books.google.co.uk/b[…]v=onepage&q&f=false

Terribly sorry. The claim I made, as I made it, was inaccurate. It should read "Increase in gun ownership means decrease in crime"
If you want statistics, the main goto person would be John Lott of UMD. You can read his main work for 17 quid http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0895261146
While he has been criticised, and not everyone agrees with the conclusions, his work is so exhaustive that it has rendered the claim "legalisation of firearms leads to an increase in crime" indefensible. The only two valid positions are now that it decreases crime, or that it has no effect on crime.

Criminals are less likely to carry weapons if there's a good chance the intended victim will have one.

Statistics from USA demonstrate that armed crime is the lowest in states in which gun ownership is the highest.

In Iceland and Switzerland armed crime is almost unknown because nearly every household has a firearm.

In Russia where the guncontrol laws are even more stringent than UK armed crime is rife.

Armed crime has increased dramatically in UK since hand gun ownership was outlawed.

Lets rid ourselves of yet another knee-jerk law restricting the vast majority of the law abiding population that was passed following the rampage of a madman. By all means keep guns out of the hands of madmen, and hand down heavy sentences to those who use them in crimes.

No firearm law has passed an independent cost/benefit analysis; none are proven to have worked. There is much research evidence by academics to provide more than enough evidence to substantiate this fact.
An extensive study from Don Kates (lawyer and criminologist associated with the Independent Institute in Oakland) and Canadian criminologist Prof. Gary Mauser confirmed the negative results of two large-scale international studies over the past 15 years. "Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide: A Review of International Evidence," Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, vol. 30, pages 651-694.) These studies compared data from a large number of nations around the world. There were no instances of nations with high gun ownership having higher murder rates than nations with low gun ownership. If anything it was the reverse.
Open your minds and read: 'The Bias Against Guns - Why Almost Everything You've Heard About Gun Control Is Wrong' by John R Lott; 'Guns & Violence - The English Experience' by Prof. Joyce Lee Malcolm; 'Firearms Control' by Colin Greenwood; 'Guns &Violence – The Debate Before Lord Cullen' by R.A.I. Munday and J.A. Stevenson; 'Restricting Handguns – The Liberal Sceptics Speak Out' edited by Don B. Kates and 'More Guns, Less Crime – Understanding Crime and Gun Laws' by J. R Lott. Such research and real evidence dispel all the myths, whims and fancies put forward with no contradictory evidence by the anti-gun, lets control inanimate objects minority. Incontrovertible evidence from the USA, where a growing number of states allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed, proves that when the majority carry (or might carry) a firearm as a defensive weapon, the minority – the gun carrying criminal – look elsewhere for defenseless victims. They always did.

GUN CONTROL IS NOT CRIME CONTROL

I share the views of most pro-gunners. I believe gun control largely has the effect of disarming the responsible citizen, whilst allowing the criminal to attack the defenseless... with guns.

Yes. Freedom to shoot and bear arms for the RESPONSIBLE CITIZENS ONLY please. That means background checks, FACs, gun registration etc.

Armed vs Unarmed victims:
http://www.youtube.com/watc[…]amp;feature=player_embedded

We need people who can shoot when the Muslims kick off WW3.

Gun control was first properly enacted in the UK during the 1950s and 60s, and since then the laws have gotten tighter and tighter. However since then gun crime has only increased, and it has never dropped bellow the level it was pre 1950s, not once.

Anti-gun advocates have to face the fact that gun control has failed to do what it set out to do. It would be pointless to throw any more restrictions on legal gun ownership, because it simply wont do anything.