Topic > Pros and cons of gun control in the political debate

“There are enough guns in America for every family to have at least two” (Why own a gun? Protection is now the main reason.) He claims that America simply has too many guns and that we don't need them anymore and that more guns will only lead to more murders. Having too many guns is like saying there are too many cats. There are some people out there who have crazy numbers of cats. But the fact is, unless you're really paranoid, people couldn't care less how many you have. The article states: “Even Latin American countries overrun by drug cartels, with homicide rates comparable to those in war zones, such as Colombia, Mexico and Guatemala, have fewer guns per capita.” Even actual war zones, such as Somalia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, have less heavy weapons." If all these countries have fewer weapons and more corruption this shows that the problem is not weapons, but people. All in all, saying we have too many is a weak reason to fight for gun control. (Morris) Most mass killings involve the use of assault rifles or magazines carrying large quantities of ammunition. For example, when the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting occurred, the shooter was using an assault rifle. If we had gun control, we would probably ban the use of any assault rifles and could prevent mass killings from happening. There is no guarantee for this theory because it seems that no matter how hard you try to ban something criminals always find