Well can you explain to me why it worked in other major countries, the U.S has the most crimes, there has to be a relation between the most guns and the highest crime rate!

http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Total-crimes

here is the link to most peaceful countries:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ first-global-peace-index-ranks-121-countries-58694072.html

here is my source:

http://www.statisticbrain.com/safest-countries-to-live-in-the-world/

but why is the U.S not in the safest countries since they have so many guns?

Here is a list of most peaceful countries this time america is 96!

What are you proving all I see is a bunch of court cases?

Well Chicago is a state, guns could be brought in from other states.

What information are you talking about? which information?

Can anyone tell me why the u.s shouldn't follow the same path as Australia?

Strict gun laws in australia made after a school shooting in 1996 has made about 650,000 automatic and semi-automatic weapons destroyed. Since then the gun related homicides dropped 59% between 1996 and 2006 and suicides by gun dropped 65%. Also before the shooting in 1996 there had been 11 school shootings after the strict gun laws there were ZERO shootings. Why shouldn’t america follow the same example?

link: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2012/1224/Could-the-US-learn-from-Australia-s-gun- control-laws

Another related post to australia, in this link you can see that australia’s homicides with a gun went down after all the gun laws in 1996. There is a graph that shows the homicide with a firearm from 1915 to 2007, in the graph you can see that in 1968 the percentage of homicides was 44% and at it’s highest and then you can see it going down with the laws that took away many guns, where it is only 16% in 2000-2001.

http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide.html

You are saying that more guns means that most self defense. You are saying that gun makes you safe, well the U.S has the most guns so therefore it should be the safest country in the world or at least one of the safest. Well No! it is 88th in the world! You explain that to me!

THis is an article that proves that guns are not so much used in self defense. This article is specifically proving a poll where it is said that there is 2.5 million self defense uses. 2.5 million, that means that there are a self defense case every 13 seconds! are you joking! I bet that most of those cases are fake or just someone had a a gun.

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/07/30/opinion/frum-guns-safer/

Strict gun laws in Australia made after a school shooting in 1996 has made about 650,000 automatic and semi-automatic weapons destroyed. Since then the gun related homicides dropped 59% between 1996 and 2006 and suicides by gun dropped 65%. Also before the shooting in 1996 there had been 11 school shootings after the strict gun laws there were ZERO shootings. Why shouldn’t america follow the same example? Well look at Australia it is an entire country and after banning guns their homicide with a gun rate dropped!

link: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2012/1224/Could-the-US-learn-from-Australia-s-gun- control-laws

In this link you can see there has been 87 school shootings in the U.S since Sandy Hook, Sandy Hook was in 2012!

Do you want to live in a society where the more guns the bad guys have the more the good guys have to have guns. An example you can relate to is:

Do you want to go on a plane where everyone has a gun so that if there is a hijacking then you can stop it. I don’t think that much people want to fly in a plane where everyone has a gun. Now do you want to line in the U.S where everyone has a gun? If you answer no to that question then you understand why the right to bear arms should not apply to us nowadays.

People with guns kill many more people than they would if they didn't have guns. People are suicidal all over the world, people get angry all over the world but we don't see mass shootings every few weeks in England or Costa Rica or Japan, the reason for that is because in those places it is not as easy to have access to guns as it is in America People don't kill people, people kill people with a gun.

Today we are here to discuss the second amendment in the U.S. We will try to convince you that the 2 amendment is not beneficial to the united states. Our main arguments to persuade you are:

people dont kill people,people kill people with guns

Guns are so easily accessed that people don’t think twice before buying one

way too often kids find one of their parents guns and subconsciously shoot kids at school or their parents

More guns, equals more deaths!!

We hope that after this debate you will understand why the 2 amendment is a right that we should have today, maybe back then when the law was passed but not nowadays.

In your contract you should have had the right to know what your image is being used in. You should know that once your image is out there then you can't just delete it that is why you should still know where it is or what it is used in.

I disagree with what you said. It is the celebrity 's responsibility to check the company first. The company does what it wants, but the celebrity should know at least do a background check on the company as they are greatly involving themselves.

Yes should be. When you agree to have your name on something first you should do some background check of what that company does. An example is when Michel Jordan figured put his name on some shoes who were made by children. Michel Jordan should have checked the company and how shoes were made. It is his responsibility to check that what he puts his name on, it is not something that the public would appreciate.