Well, all of my points are made i will not repeat myself. Only one question. How a government that can't prevent USA for getting 30 million illegals can prevent someone from getting a illegal gun?
1) Those are completely separate issues. Being unable to solve one problem does not imply the inability to solve any problem. 2) I'm not sure the government "cannot" prevent illegals in the strict sense is a correct statement.
How a government that can't prevent USA for getting 30 million illegals can prevent someone from getting a illegal gun?
How can a government stop child molestation if it can't prevent 17,000 murders per year?
Both questions have the same answer. The government can't stop all crimes, but it still has to try.
OMG... Do you really think that having a gun and molesting a child are the same? If guns are outlawed, having a gun is a crime without any victim, but molesting a child have a obvious victim that probably will never recover.
How government will take milions of guns from rednecks? Do you really think that try to get hundreds of million of guns will not increase exponentially the violence?
How a government that can't prevent USA for getting 30 million illegals can prevent someone from getting a illegal gun?
How can a government stop child molestation if it can't prevent 17,000 murders per year?
Both questions have the same answer. The government can't stop all crimes, but it still has to try.
OMG... Do you really think that having a gun and molesting a child are the same? If guns are outlawed, having a gun is a crime without any victim, but molesting a child have a obvious victim that probably will never recover.
How government will take milions of guns from rednecks? Do you really think that try to get hundreds of million of guns will not increase exponentially the violence?
No one is suggesting banning guns, only a certain TYPE of gun. Which we already do, in the case of fully-automatic weapons. Beyond that, regulations put into place that don't make it easier for a 18-year old to get ahold of a weapon that does THIS more readily than he can get a Bud Light:
A better comparison to the introduction of gun control would be to look at the number of gun deaths - there was no increase in the UK in these after 1997.(...)
So doesn't matter if the rapes, if tortures, murderers. etc, etc, etc become extreme more frequent. Only "gun violence" matters?
Note that in USA according to this "gun violence" statistics, if someone invade a farm and get killed, is "gun violence"(yes, statistics tends to put self defense and suicide as "gun violence), but if gun control is approved and the attacker invade the farm, kill all man and rape all woman, then is not "gun violence"... What scenario is better?
Meanwhile in Canada:
Let me point you to this very recent case of gun violence in Canada.
A group of friends were heading back home from a swimming hole in rural Saskatchewan when they got a flat tire. They turned onto private property looking for help. With no one around they thought their best course of action was to steal a tire from a nearby parked truck so they could get home safely.
The owner of the property appeared and began firing both a rifle and a hand gun up in the air as he approached the truck with a bad tire. Before reaching the car, he removed the magazine from his gun but still had it in his hand while he reached into the truck to remove the keys from it. While doing so, the gun fired, going into the drivers head killing him instantly.
Does stealing a tire warrant a death sentence?
One person should not be able to decide if another individual is guilty of a crime. They also should not be able to pass a death sentence regardless of what that crime is. This isn't self defence. The farmer was never in danger
The farmer btw was found not guilty, and started a massive backlash against the verdict delivered, him and his gofundme page as well as how Canada selects potential jurors in cases such as these. There is also the debate of the castle doctrine in how the farmer has every right to use deadly force to defend his home.
A small silver lining in the case is that the farmer still faces more charges and is going back to court for them. Those are for gun laws requiring proper storage . This will probably result in a fine. a nice small slap in the face to the victims family and a smaller slap on the wrist for him.
-Same proof taken from same nonsense websites (federalist, breitbart) and cherry picked alt right wing youtube videos. -Continuous spamming of the same talking points that are easily debunked. At that point he moves the goalposts to some other unrelated thing.
Why is a guy supposedly from another country so in love with far right wing websites and things from the US? An international person would not be so deeply involved in right wing mania from another country. If I wanted to know about another countries politics an overview would be fine, not some deep dive into some conspiracy BS.
How a government that can't prevent USA for getting 30 million illegals can prevent someone from getting a illegal gun?
How can a government stop child molestation if it can't prevent 17,000 murders per year?
Both questions have the same answer. The government can't stop all crimes, but it still has to try.
OMG... Do you really think that having a gun and molesting a child are the same?
No. That would be stupid.
In general, if an idea seems so stupid that you can't imagine why anyone would believe it, that's probably because the other person does not believe it.
I was rephrasing your question because I disagreed with the reasoning behind it: Why should we trust the government to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, if it can't even stop immigrants from entering the country illegally? Why should the government try to solve one problem if it can't solve a different problem?
My answer was that the government can't completely solve any problem, but it can still make a difference. To take the example of illegal immigration, just because immigrants still enter the country illegally doesn't mean the government shouldn't take measures to stop some of them.
Likewise, just because some criminals will find their way around gun control laws doesn't mean we can't keep guns out of the hands of some criminals.
@smeagolheart: I wish that one individual could be blamed for all of the Internet's repetitive alt-right posting. But alas, those views and tactics are far from unique.
@smeagolheart: I wish that one individual could be blamed for all of the Internet's repetitive alt-right posting. But alas, those views and tactics are far from unique.
That may be true on "the Internet" but it may not be true here on this one site. Vanatos said he loved to be using different names and anonymous argument boards.
On my other board, where I am the mod of the politics/news/current events forum, I don't allow alts. When I find them I ban them then pm the user to let them know why. If I were to catch someone using an alt for the third time--which has never happened--I would ban the user without discussion, warning, or debate. I have seen alts cause problems between people in real life before, the worst-case scenario being killing an entire forum (the admins shut it down) and resulting in one divorce (not mine, but people I knew personally).
In other news, the special counsel has issued new charges for Paul Manafort and Rick Gates for a money laundering scheme. The scheme is apparently not related to the Trump campaign.
My answer was that the government can't completely solve any problem, but it can still make a difference. To take the example of illegal immigration, just because immigrants still enter the country illegally doesn't mean the government shouldn't take measures to stop some of them.
Likewise, just because some criminals will find their way around gun control laws doesn't mean we can't keep guns out of the hands of some criminals.
No government in this world can't remove guns for criminal organizations. Gun control only works in those who legally purchase weapons. Arms trafficking is very profitable exactly because the majority of countries adopt some form of gun control. Look to criminality in USA during 1900. Should be no crime without a victim. Everything that have no victim should not be criminalized, that include prostitution, discrimination, etc
Gangsters wins with gun control(disarm his victims) Politicians wins with gun control(more state dependency) Rapists wins with gun control Arm traffickers wins with gun control(makes the market very profitable) (...) But i don't see how the average good person wins losing his chance to defend.
--------------
To be honest, i give up. If USA approve gun control, everyone who have guns will give his guns without any resistance and no officer will sell weapons to criminals, even if they have his family members threatened. Because laws works like magic!!! Criminals will not purchase or sell illegal guns(even if it is a very profitable to do this) and nobody will make homemade guns, doesn't matter how profitable a black market is and the people who lose his jobs in firing ranges and weapon manufacturing will find another job in one day, professional assassins will destroy or give his weapons to government because a murder will never dare to have a illegal gun and the good citizen can use a cellphone if he is on danger and the police will instant materialize on his side, will not take a long time to come. Soon USA will be a paraeise with no gun criminality like Chicago!!! /sarcasm
PS : In last century more people died by his own state violence than by wars.
The armed guard at the school during the school shooting in Florida never bothered to go inside during the shooting.
So Trump wants trained veterans, some with PTSD who are poorly supported by the failing VA health system, to be armed in classrooms. And he said he wants them to get a bonus. No not an increased salary, a 1 time bonus. Would your geometry teacher be able to shoot the right kids quickly enough to stop the next mass shooter?
I mean after all they had a whole bunch of armed guards at the Mandalay Bay. The shooter even shot one before killing hundreds of people at the concert. The Fort hood shooter shot people on a military base where people had guns. There was an armed guard at the pulse nightclub, it didn't help. Ronald Reagan and JFK had armed secret service people around them and got shot. The Republicans playing softball had armed guards nearby.
Should be no crime without a victim. Everything that have no victim should not be criminalized, that include prostitution, discrimination, etc
I'm glad you've given up on the gun thing, but what makes you say that discrimination is victimless?
No, everyone discriminate in his life. The difference is the social acceptance of some type of discrimination. For example, a woman say "I'd cross the street to get away from a man" is socially accepted but say the same think about race is not socially accepted... I an not advocating for institutionalized discrimination, but i don't see any problem with private discrimination. Imagine if every WN moves to a area and let the rest of world in peace. They will be happy and everyone else will be happy.
The point of this discussion is not to win debates or convince the other side; it's to exchange ideas and information. Only very seldom do people change their minds in this thread (though it does happen!), but that's only part of the equation. The greater context is that these discussions help show different points of view and new ideas to everyone who reads it.
That's good for all of us. I mean, we don't need to argue indefinitely about every subject, because eventually we'd start going in circles, but it's definitely worth engaging in these debates as long as we stay focused on real issues and facts.
Even those of us who don't change our minds will still be a little more enlightened just by listening.
The point of this discussion is not to win debates or convince the other side; it's to exchange ideas and information. Only very seldom do people change their minds in this thread (though it does happen!), but that's only part of the equation. The greater context is that these discussions help show different points of view and new ideas to everyone who reads it.
That's good for all of us. I mean, we don't need to argue indefinitely about every subject, because eventually we'd start going in circles, but it's definitely worth engaging in these debates as long as we stay focused on real issues and facts.
Even those of us who don't change our minds will still be a little more enlightened just by listening.
I agree, but i already posted the majority of my arguments and pro gun control people already posted all of his arguments.
In what would be much bigger news (I would assume) if the Parkland students hadn't managed to miraculously keep the gun debate going past the typical 3-5 day news cycle we have become accustomed to after these massacres, the Republican Governor of Missouri has been indicted and taken into custody on felony invasion of privacy charges that seem to stem from an attempt to blackmail his mistress with nude photos.
In what would be much bigger news (I would assume) if the Parkland students hadn't managed to miraculously keep the gun debate going past the typical 3-5 day news cycle we have become accustomed to after these massacres, the Republican Governor of Missouri has been indicted and taken into custody on felony invasion of privacy charges that seem to stem from an attempt to blackmail his mistress with nude photos.
And here's a reminder that everyone gave Trump a pass for first releasing the misleading partisan nunes memo and then when he refused to release the democrats memo that strongly counters and provides facts. Not heard a peep about that in a week.
Everybody just accepted that he's a lying hypocrite I guess they're OK with that.
Jesus. How does an alternative account cause a divorce?
I will recount the condensed version. The alt was supposedly someone both parties knew. Before long, the alt was making snide comments and suggesting that they were having an affair with one of the two and that that person was happier with the alt. Eventually, it was discovered that the alt was an alt and by then the damage had escalated to the point where the party of the first part kicked the party of the second part out of the house. It was...surreal...to watch it all unfold before our eyes. It was a small board and we were all close--knew each other personally, in fact. I take care to avoid getting that close to forum members these days--nothing personal against any of you, but nothing personal. Except Noty, but you should know why.
Anyway...we were donating to the admin to keep the forum active but after that most people left. Since he had already been out of work for a year by that time, when the donations dried up he had no choice but to pull the plug.
...I think it's fair to say that we've reached the "going in circles" phase and can move on for now.
Well said. Circle, both sides are showing the same argument. For video, here is a good example of a youtuber talking about gun control and show new arguments.
I personally never understood the leftist logic. - Police is fascist and kill minorities / you don't need guns because you have police(takes a long time to come) - Trump is evil / Trump should decide who can have guns - Prohibit abortion will not work because woman can abort in other country/ prohibit guns will work and no criminal will get a illegal gun across border or homemade - The state oppress working class / The state should regulate the work for working class (...)
If you wanna save lives, why not try to spend less taxpayer money into stupid wars? Why not ban politicians from destabilize other countries?
I personally never understood the leftist logic. - Police is fascist and kill minorities / you don't need guns because you have police(takes a long time to come) - Trump is evil / Trump should decide who can have guns - Prohibit abortion will not work because woman can abort in other country/ prohibit guns will work and no criminal will get a illegal gun across border or homemade - The state oppress working class / The state should regulate the work for working class (...)
If you wanna save lives, why not try to spend less taxpayer money into stupid wars? Why not ban politicians from destabilize other countries?
Very true, you don't understand leftist logic. You have a very poor understanding of what the left wants if you think those are the things people want.
I suggest you expose yourself to other sources of information than far right US people with extreme opinions. They do NOT at all represent most American's view points. They are fringe groups who often endorse hating people or things they don't understand. Being a foreigner, supposedly, I wonder how you ended up down these rabbit holes.
- Police is fascist and kill minorities / you don't need guns because you have police(takes a long time to come)
Police kill minorities way too often. The problem is militarized police with too many guns. They are nervous because they are taught that everybody has a gun. And that's possible because there's way too many guns in the US. The result is police are quick to shoot if they even consider you might have a gun. It seems to affect minorities more, so likely there's also a racist undertone to things. Better training is needed and yes less guns. Police in the UK and other places don't have them. That makes them far less likely to shoot on sight.
- Trump is evil / Trump should decide who can have guns Trump should not decide anything.
- Prohibit abortion will not work because woman can abort in other country/ prohibit guns will work and no criminal will get a illegal gun across border or homemade um ok. Never heard anyone say these things. The left doesn't want to prohibit abortion because they want women to be able to choose their family planning situation. Maybe they can't afford kids or got raped. They should be able to choose whether to have kids or not. If people get an illegal guns they should go jail. Nobody is making these arguments you are making.
- The state oppress working class / The state should regulate the work for working class Nobody is saying this. The system is rigged against the working class ok. It should be less so. There should be regulations because no regulations are anarchy. The choice is not no regulations or all regulations.
-If you wanna save lives, why not try to spend less taxpayer money into stupid wars? Why not ban politicians from destabilize other countries? This isn't so crazy.
Being a foreigner, supposedly, I wonder how you ended up down these rabbit holes.
Yes, i an a foreigner and i know what is to live in a leftist country. I lost a university "slot" because we have affirmative actions to protect the majority from minority(and yes, whites are minority here) and only managed to join in university 6 months later, i saw a lot of criminals with very powerful guns while police have no way to prevent crime, i saw with my own eyes how this simple won't work. I saw a lot of business closing doors because new regulations was approved and i saw with my own eyes a lot of homeless people, each day more homeless people because the government tries to control everything.
You are luckily to be born in a country that have a decentralized government, freedom of speech, propriety rights, gun rights, etc. The majority of the world don't have that privilege. And now the left wanna have affirmative actions on companies, all IT companies with bankrupt or move to other country if it happens and will be impossible for me to get a job. I can do freelancer work, but will never be able to work in my home country thanks to affirmative action. And be white in a tropical country is not advantageous, if you wanna see why, here is a photo of my skin after a little sun in Santa Catarina with is not hot as Hell de Janeiro https://postimg.org/image/pkh2ke3b9/
Argentina was the 11th richest country in world. After Peronism and a lot of populists and leftists ruining Argentina, Argentina become poorer. Not poor as Venezuela, in fact Argentina still can be compared to a poor European country, but is not even on top 50 GDP per capta. That can happens in USA too.
Police kill minorities way too often. The problem is militarized police with too many guns. They are nervous because they are taught that everybody has a gun. And that's possible because there's way too many guns in the US. The result is police are quick to shoot if they even consider you might have a gun. It seems to affect minorities more, so likely there's also a racist undertone to things. Better training is needed and yes less guns. Police in the UK and other places don't have them. That makes them far less likely to shoot on sight.
Never heard anyone say these things. The left doesn't want to prohibit abortion because they want women to be able to choose their family planning situation. Maybe they can't afford kids or got raped. They should be able to choose whether to have kids or not. If people get an illegal guns they should go jail. Nobody is making these arguments you are making.
There are 300m+ guns in USA. Lets suppose than more than 90% of gun owners give up his guns. You will trow millions of people in prison only to make guns monopoly from government and criminals? What will be the social, economic and criminal impact of this?
Nobody is saying this. The system is rigged against the working class ok. It should be less so. There should be regulations because no regulations are anarchy. The choice is not no regulations or all regulations.
And who will make the regulations? Those who control the system that is "rigged against the working class" and not having regulations is not anarchy. USA had gold standard, no NFA, no FED, etc some generations ago. Was USA anarchist in that time?
The US had children laboring away and women who could not vote and on and on. We have had the great depression due to unregulated wall street.
It was a different time. We want change today to make things better. The choice isn't all regulations or no regulations.
Yes the government will make the laws or change the laws. Right now, things are not great due to Republicans gerrymandering we hg Ave a government that only represents a small fraction of the people correctly. We must vote these sonofabitches out despite this. We must replace them with people who will represent people more than corporate interests.
Just because Argentina has had a bad experience with leftist stuff - which I would need to research to discuss - doesn't mean it will be the same in every country. In fact it seems like you have the one exception to the rule. The UK, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, Australia have governments that would be extremely far left compared to the US and are very successful countries.
Comments
1) Those are completely separate issues. Being unable to solve one problem does not imply the inability to solve any problem.
2) I'm not sure the government "cannot" prevent illegals in the strict sense is a correct statement.
Both questions have the same answer. The government can't stop all crimes, but it still has to try.
How government will take milions of guns from rednecks? Do you really think that try to get hundreds of million of guns will not increase exponentially the violence?
Let me point you to this very recent case of gun violence in Canada.
A group of friends were heading back home from a swimming hole in rural Saskatchewan when they got a flat tire. They turned onto private property looking for help. With no one around they thought their best course of action was to steal a tire from a nearby parked truck so they could get home safely.
The owner of the property appeared and began firing both a rifle and a hand gun up in the air as he approached the truck with a bad tire. Before reaching the car, he removed the magazine from his gun but still had it in his hand while he reached into the truck to remove the keys from it. While doing so, the gun fired, going into the drivers head killing him instantly.
Does stealing a tire warrant a death sentence?
One person should not be able to decide if another individual is guilty of a crime. They also should not be able to pass a death sentence regardless of what that crime is. This isn't self defence. The farmer was never in danger
The farmer btw was found not guilty, and started a massive backlash against the verdict delivered, him and his gofundme page as well as how Canada selects potential jurors in cases such as these. There is also the debate of the castle doctrine in how the farmer has every right to use deadly force to defend his home.
A small silver lining in the case is that the farmer still faces more charges and is going back to court for them. Those are for gun laws requiring proper storage . This will probably result in a fine. a nice small slap in the face to the victims family and a smaller slap on the wrist for him.
Nice points from Styxhexenhammer666
-Same proof taken from same nonsense websites (federalist, breitbart) and cherry picked alt right wing youtube videos.
-Continuous spamming of the same talking points that are easily debunked. At that point he moves the goalposts to some other unrelated thing.
Why is a guy supposedly from another country so in love with far right wing websites and things from the US? An international person would not be so deeply involved in right wing mania from another country. If I wanted to know about another countries politics an overview would be fine, not some deep dive into some conspiracy BS.
In general, if an idea seems so stupid that you can't imagine why anyone would believe it, that's probably because the other person does not believe it.
I was rephrasing your question because I disagreed with the reasoning behind it: Why should we trust the government to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, if it can't even stop immigrants from entering the country illegally? Why should the government try to solve one problem if it can't solve a different problem?
My answer was that the government can't completely solve any problem, but it can still make a difference. To take the example of illegal immigration, just because immigrants still enter the country illegally doesn't mean the government shouldn't take measures to stop some of them.
Likewise, just because some criminals will find their way around gun control laws doesn't mean we can't keep guns out of the hands of some criminals.
Gangsters wins with gun control(disarm his victims)
Politicians wins with gun control(more state dependency)
Rapists wins with gun control
Arm traffickers wins with gun control(makes the market very profitable)
(...)
But i don't see how the average good person wins losing his chance to defend.
--------------
To be honest, i give up. If USA approve gun control, everyone who have guns will give his guns without any resistance and no officer will sell weapons to criminals, even if they have his family members threatened. Because laws works like magic!!! Criminals will not purchase or sell illegal guns(even if it is a very profitable to do this) and nobody will make homemade guns, doesn't matter how profitable a black market is and the people who lose his jobs in firing ranges and weapon manufacturing will find another job in one day, professional assassins will destroy or give his weapons to government because a murder will never dare to have a illegal gun and the good citizen can use a cellphone if he is on danger and the police will instant materialize on his side, will not take a long time to come. Soon USA will be a paraeise with no gun criminality like Chicago!!! /sarcasm
PS : In last century more people died by his own state violence than by wars.
The armed guard at the school during the school shooting in Florida never bothered to go inside during the shooting.
So Trump wants trained veterans, some with PTSD who are poorly supported by the failing VA health system, to be armed in classrooms. And he said he wants them to get a bonus. No not an increased salary, a 1 time bonus. Would your geometry teacher be able to shoot the right kids quickly enough to stop the next mass shooter?
I mean after all they had a whole bunch of armed guards at the Mandalay Bay. The shooter even shot one before killing hundreds of people at the concert. The Fort hood shooter shot people on a military base where people had guns. There was an armed guard at the pulse nightclub, it didn't help. Ronald Reagan and JFK had armed secret service people around them and got shot. The Republicans playing softball had armed guards nearby.
The point of this discussion is not to win debates or convince the other side; it's to exchange ideas and information. Only very seldom do people change their minds in this thread (though it does happen!), but that's only part of the equation. The greater context is that these discussions help show different points of view and new ideas to everyone who reads it.
That's good for all of us. I mean, we don't need to argue indefinitely about every subject, because eventually we'd start going in circles, but it's definitely worth engaging in these debates as long as we stay focused on real issues and facts.
Even those of us who don't change our minds will still be a little more enlightened just by listening.
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/954467#Comment_954467
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/956778#Comment_956778
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/956819#Comment_956819
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/956834#Comment_956834
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/957081#Comment_957081
...I think it's fair to say that we've reached the "going in circles" phase and can move on for now.
Everybody just accepted that he's a lying hypocrite I guess they're OK with that.
Anyway...we were donating to the admin to keep the forum active but after that most people left. Since he had already been out of work for a year by that time, when the donations dried up he had no choice but to pull the plug.
I personally never understood the leftist logic.
- Police is fascist and kill minorities / you don't need guns because you have police(takes a long time to come)
- Trump is evil / Trump should decide who can have guns
- Prohibit abortion will not work because woman can abort in other country/ prohibit guns will work and no criminal will get a illegal gun across border or homemade
- The state oppress working class / The state should regulate the work for working class
(...)
If you wanna save lives, why not try to spend less taxpayer money into stupid wars? Why not ban politicians from destabilize other countries?
I suggest you expose yourself to other sources of information than far right US people with extreme opinions. They do NOT at all represent most American's view points. They are fringe groups who often endorse hating people or things they don't understand. Being a foreigner, supposedly, I wonder how you ended up down these rabbit holes.
- Police is fascist and kill minorities / you don't need guns because you have police(takes a long time to come)
Police kill minorities way too often. The problem is militarized police with too many guns. They are nervous because they are taught that everybody has a gun. And that's possible because there's way too many guns in the US. The result is police are quick to shoot if they even consider you might have a gun. It seems to affect minorities more, so likely there's also a racist undertone to things. Better training is needed and yes less guns. Police in the UK and other places don't have them. That makes them far less likely to shoot on sight.
- Trump is evil / Trump should decide who can have guns
Trump should not decide anything.
- Prohibit abortion will not work because woman can abort in other country/ prohibit guns will work and no criminal will get a illegal gun across border or homemade
um ok. Never heard anyone say these things. The left doesn't want to prohibit abortion because they want women to be able to choose their family planning situation. Maybe they can't afford kids or got raped. They should be able to choose whether to have kids or not. If people get an illegal guns they should go jail. Nobody is making these arguments you are making.
- The state oppress working class / The state should regulate the work for working class
Nobody is saying this. The system is rigged against the working class ok. It should be less so. There should be regulations because no regulations are anarchy. The choice is not no regulations or all regulations.
-If you wanna save lives, why not try to spend less taxpayer money into stupid wars? Why not ban politicians from destabilize other countries?
This isn't so crazy.
You are luckily to be born in a country that have a decentralized government, freedom of speech, propriety rights, gun rights, etc. The majority of the world don't have that privilege. And now the left wanna have affirmative actions on companies, all IT companies with bankrupt or move to other country if it happens and will be impossible for me to get a job. I can do freelancer work, but will never be able to work in my home country thanks to affirmative action. And be white in a tropical country is not advantageous, if you wanna see why, here is a photo of my skin after a little sun in Santa Catarina with is not hot as Hell de Janeiro https://postimg.org/image/pkh2ke3b9/
Argentina was the 11th richest country in world. After Peronism and a lot of populists and leftists ruining Argentina, Argentina become poorer. Not poor as Venezuela, in fact Argentina still can be compared to a poor European country, but is not even on top 50 GDP per capta. That can happens in USA too.
There are a controversial study showing that police is more likely to shoot white guys ( https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/13/why-a-massive-new-study-on-police-shootings-of-whites-and-blacks-is-so-controversial/?utm_term=.8940e7295fea ) but my point is, if police is unprepared, you should not relay on ONLY in police. There are 300m+ guns in USA. Lets suppose than more than 90% of gun owners give up his guns. You will trow millions of people in prison only to make guns monopoly from government and criminals? What will be the social, economic and criminal impact of this? And who will make the regulations? Those who control the system that is "rigged against the working class" and not having regulations is not anarchy. USA had gold standard, no NFA, no FED, etc some generations ago. Was USA anarchist in that time?
It was a different time. We want change today to make things better. The choice isn't all regulations or no regulations.
Yes the government will make the laws or change the laws. Right now, things are not great due to Republicans gerrymandering we hg Ave a government that only represents a small fraction of the people correctly. We must vote these sonofabitches out despite this. We must replace them with people who will represent people more than corporate interests.
Just because Argentina has had a bad experience with leftist stuff - which I would need to research to discuss - doesn't mean it will be the same in every country. In fact it seems like you have the one exception to the rule. The UK, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, Australia have governments that would be extremely far left compared to the US and are very successful countries.