Guns in America

  • More Options

VN:F [1.9.16_1159]
Rating: 5.9/10 (17 votes cast)
Is This Documentary Broken?
(Click Here To Let Us Know)

United states of America is the most heavily armed society in the world; nearly 80 million Americans own guns. Explore the gun culture in America, from a police officer to a young mother.

Guns in America, 5.9 out of 10 based on 17 ratings

Related Documentaries

From The Web

  • ryan

    The main reason law abiding citizens (the only people that gun control laws affect) is for self-defense. the crap about “guns in home are 22x more likely to kill” is a deceptive statistic which includes homicides and suicides.

    This documentary is biased against guns. It becomes noticable with such comments like “(when the states banished gun control) it was bad news for the police”

    • Nancy

      “This documentary is biased against guns.” Good! That is the logical & sane view. Guns are designed to kill. Therefore the only reason to have a gun is to kill. And whilst this should be stating the obvious, killing is not good.

      • Alyssa

        Knives? Archery equipment? Should these be banned as well? Goodness, a person can kill with his or her bare hands and you can’t ban those without making every citizen a prisoner. I hate to torture another neo-con cliche but it stands to reason that if guns are criminalized, only criminals will own them. I don’t feel like elaborating my own personal opinions on this issue much further on something so trivial as the comments section to a video I’m no longer interested in watching. If you’re interested, check out this BBC article [ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1566715.stm ]. It’s a year old, but it’s an article which I feel illustrates my point more clearly than I can. Dig further, if you like and compare the statistics of gun crime in Switzerland where gun ownership goes largely unregulated with those of England where civilian gun ownership is banned. Though I’m not a supporter of the military draft, I appreciate the way business is done in Switzerland. And note the third paragraph up from the very bottom. “It has none of the social problems associated with gun crime seen in other industrialised countries like drugs or urban deprivation.” You should acknowledge that there are many facets to violent crime beyond just access to weapons. Maybe as a country we should do more to address that, rather than strip everyone of a constitutional right because we’ve grown to lazy to raise our children right and take care of our fellow human being.

        • KhL

          Re. banning knives – your reasoning is flawed as: (i) guns are designed to kill, whilst knives have many other functions, and (ii) mass murders / spree killers invariably choose guns rather than knives … they would not kill as many people if they only had access to knives.

          Re. Switzerland’s low rate of gun crime despite the wide ownership of guns. Gun ownership is also wide spread in the US but it has a very high rate of gun crime .. this indicates there is something seriously amiss with US society.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_M73THX2LLJZJC6V7EBESDSDH4E kijafha

            WRONG: http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jun/09/world/fg-stab9
            In Japan guns are banned and they spree kill just fine without them so you are WRONG. “killing seven people and wounding 10,” with one car and one knife.

        • http://www.facebook.com/jeroen.schippers.77 Jeroen Schippers

          Retard. Yes, indeed this should be banned as well.

      • Joe

        “Guns are designed to kill.” Umm, actually, guns are designed to shoot bullets. “Therefore the only reason to have a gun is to kill.” That is the most illogical and insane reasoning ever spewed. It’s like saying steak knives are designed to cut steak, therefore the only reason to have a steak knife is to cut steak. How about owning a gun to act as a deterrent to protect yourself from some criminal that decides to break into your house?
        .
        Nancy, I think you need to be completely alone in a big house at night with no phone and no gun and have a gang of knife-wielding thugs break into your bedroom. Then you can cry “Killing is not good!”

        • ReplyToJoe

          Reply to Joe: Your noted to “Nancy, I think you need to be completely alone in a big house at night with no phone and no gun and have a gang of knife-wielding thugs break into your bedroom. Then you can cry “Killing is not good!””

          What a nasty and vindictive comment to make to anyone. Shame on you.

          • John T. Cummings

            Fully agree.

            Voltaire said: “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”

            Joe said: “I do not agree with what you have to say so I hope thugs rape & kill you.”

          • Voltaire77

            I do not agree with what Joe has to say, but I’ll defend to the death his right to say it…

        • http://www.facebook.com/jeroen.schippers.77 Jeroen Schippers

          Hi Joe,……..really? How many times has this happened to you? I guess never and still you think this is the number one reason to own a gun. I feel bad for you.

  • Harry A. Grabill

    “the only people that gun control laws affect”

    Wrong, wrong, wrong.

    More stringent gun controls = Less guns.
    Less guns = Fewer deaths.

    • http://www.nra.com R. Reagan

      Not true at all.

      In the 1970s, the Soviet Union had twice the number of homicides of the USA in the same period. If we compare gun laws, the Soviets did not allow civillian ownership of all firearms, whilest the USA was fairly open in its gun laws.

      And to reply to Nancy’s comment: Guns are designed to kill, however; what they are killing is the most important fact. Is the target of a firearm a ground squirrel with a .22 or a potential rapist with a .45?

  • Nancy

    I concur with Harry A. Grabill comment: “Less guns = Fewer deaths.”

    And in reply to R. Reagan: “And to reply to Nancy’s comment: Guns are designed to kill, however; what they are killing is the most important fact. Is the target of a firearm a ground squirrel with a .22 or a potential rapist with a .45?” What is the value of killing ground squirrel? Most murderers, and especially serial killers, started off by killing animals before ‘progressing’ to humans. It needs to be more widely recognised that anybody who enjoys killing animals is a potential serial killer: this is afact accepted to many psychologists and psychiatrists.

    • http://www.nra.com R. Reagan

      So every person that has ever hunted is a “potential serial killer”? Around 12.5 million Americans enjoy the sport of hunting every year out of a population of 300 million. Furthermore, to use your logic every person, that has ever enjoyed a chicken, steak or freshly-taken deer dinner is condoning vicious murder.

      On a personal note: I used to live out on farmland in the country; one of the largest causes of barnfires is vermin (such as squirrels) chewing through electrical cable inside the barn. Many a farmer has lost the lives of all their cattle to a barnfire or worse if the squirrel gets inside the house.

      • Zomba1965

        hi ronald not too sure if it is practiced in america but have you heard of hunting with dogs and a sharp knife? dogs for the bail and hold. then you go in for the kill?

  • Nancy

    “..to use your logic every person, that has ever enjoyed a chicken, steak or freshly-taken deer dinner is condoning vicious murder.” I made no such claim, and your statement is not even twisting my words as it is complete fabrication.

    As I noted, it is well recognised amongst psychologists and psychiatrists that the enjoyment of killing animals is a key indicator in the development of killers, and especially serial killers.

    • http://www.nra.com R. Reagan

      You made no such claim; however, to expand on your own analogy, every person that has enjoyed eating meat is savouring the product of a “murder”. In addition, you have no source(s) for your continuting statements that “…the enjoyment of killing animals is a key indicatior in the development of…serial killers”. If currently 14-12.5 million Americans (from a non-biased goverment study) all enjoy hunting, why is it that America is allowing so many developing serial killers to go unchecked? Furthermore, our ancestors all hunted since the dawn of time, so according to your bullshit, we’re all descendents of fucking Ted Bundy.

      • Nancy

        What on Earth are you taking about when you state “You made no such claim”?

        My first statement was “anybody who enjoys killing animals is a potential serial killer: this is afact accepted to many psychologists and psychiatrists.”

        I followed this with “it is well recognised amongst psychologists and psychiatrists that the enjoyment of killing animals is a key indicator in the development of killers, and especially serial killers.”

        Those two statements are complimentary and supportive to the extent of being identical.

        You are, of course, in error to state “to expand on your own analogy”, because (i) it was not an analogy as I was reported what is accepted in the mental health professions, and (ii) even if it was an analogy it is a flawed debating technique to expand upon analogies.

        Later you state “You have no source(s) for your continuting statements that ‘…the enjoyment of killing animals is a key indicatior in the development of…serial killers.’” Again you are wrong. The source is decades of research into murderers, and the results of such are readily available in even mass-market literature.

        Finally you claim that “.. our ancestors all hunted since the dawn of time, so according to your bullshit, we’re all descendents of fucking Ted Bundy.” Is such twisted and flawed reasoning as would be embarrassing for a pre-teenager to suggest.

        That you descend to swearing is indicative of a weak argument and, it must be noted, of both poor reasoning abilities and low mental abilities.

  • Pingback: Disaster Plans?

  • Akolyte

    I think that there is no harm in owning a gun for the purpose of hunting or home defense. Taking away guns from the civilian population leaves only the police and the criminals armed. That wouldn’t be a problem in a perfect world but just as often as not, the police are also the criminals or at very minimum turn a blind eye to the activities of wealthy and influential criminals.

    As far as the non-sense about all people who kill animals are potential serial killers give me a break. Unless your a puritan vegan you contribute to the death and exploitation of animals every day of your life by eating the foods you eat. So in that line of reasoning then you must be supporting mass murder.

    Hunting is perfectly natural and I am sorry the Native peoples where a hell of a lot more in touch with nature than any self-righteous hippie vegans. Hunting was part of their way of life just as it is part of the way of life of many North Americans today.

    A word of advice to my American neighbours to the south, never let your government disarm you. To do so would be to invite tyranny to take the place of the freedom your founding fathers fought so hard to bring you.

  • Muthu

    US going to Good

  • strangefacekid

    I struggle to justify anyone having the ”RIGHT” to posess an impliment that would rob another human being of their life…

    • Joe

      You don’t need to justify anything. The right is already written into the US constitution as the second amendment. Shooting an attacker in your home is not robbing them of their life. Try not to be so naive.

      • http://www.facebook.com/jeroen.schippers.77 Jeroen Schippers

        Retard

      • http://www.facebook.com/stephen.dedalus.560 Stephen Dedalus

        Constitutions can be changed, and unjustifiable amendments can be altered. But as a side note, if you actually read the second amendment you’d see that it doesn’t allow unrestricted public access to guns – nothing even close to that.

  • Ryan

    Its amazing how naive anti-gun proponents can be. Just because you make something illegal doesnt mean it is just going to disappear. I could go downtown right now and easily find almost any type of illegal drug from multiple sources. Guns would be no different if they were illegal.If you make guns illegal they will still be readily avaiable on the black market just 10x more expensive with all the profits going to criminals and gangs. Therefore only criminals will be in possession of guns. Also, only around 5% of homicides are perpetrated by legal gun owners. Google the statistics and quit being pussies about this issue.

  • Kate

    Well in New Zealand our police don’t even have guns. And we do just fine. Gun ownership is a weird American thing that the rest of the world will never understand. They will continue to kill each other with guns forever and ever because they’re too proud to address an obvious problem.

    • 606

      spot on , cops carrying guns here in england would be something people wouldn’t find acceptable either – america would rather have 9mms than a national health service

    • Info

      Your Stupid,   Lets see who bails or protects your ass when you get invaded next time!!

      • Guest

        New Zealand wont get invaded cause you like us all to much and we wont hurt a fly. Cops have guns they just dont carry them on their person. There is a special unit called the arm defenders squad that is brought in if needed. 

      • Geoff

        Oh yeah You never know when the Fijian army will come over.

    • johnny gun

      hi kate if police in nz dont have guns what happened to steven wallace?

  • Roni

    I am a physically weak person, I do not like violence, and I would probably never carry an instrument of violence. A person like me benefits the most from legislature that allows concealed firearm carry. To not see this is pure stupid. Criminals will always have guns.
    Gun prohibition only makes matters worse for law-abiding folks like me. A criminal knows he can rob any “honest” person just by wawing a gun at their face. Thus the gun becomes more important in criminals life, and more criminals will want one.

    This is such a simple matter. It makes me cry to read comments like “yes we must oppose guns with strict law to ban them”, when banning will only increase the demand in the market. The supply always follows, no matter the law.

    • NoxLupi

      loosing a watch and wallet is a damn shame but, if you think that waving a gun around makes the situation less dangerous, I seriously give up! In my country we have about 3-5 killings with a gun within 5 years. multiply that by a thousand and you have the amount killings in the US in 1 freaking day. hell you have more killings by firearm accidents that we have killings all together.

  • Roni

    I’m a physically weak person, I do not like violence, and I would probably never carry an instrument of violence. A person like me benefits the most from legislature that allows concealed firearm carry. To not see this is pure stupid. Criminals will always have guns.
    Gun prohibition only makes matters worse for law-abiding folks like me. A criminal knows he can rob any “honest” person just by wawing a gun at their face. Thus the gun becomes more important in criminals life, and more criminals will want one.

    This is such a simple matter. It makes me cry to read comments like “yes we must oppose guns with strict law to ban them”, when banning will only increase the demand in the market. The supply always follows, no matter the law.

  • Jeremy

    It’s soooo convenient how much some people love the Bill of Rights until it comes to that 2nd Amendment huh? Can’t pick and choose folks, either you support civil liberties or you have an agenda; and I’m sadly unsurprised the opinions of this site’s visitors tend to fall on the “modern left-wing agenda uber alles” side of things. I wonder how you think of people like me who are pro-choice, pro gay marriage, firm 1st Amendment supporters but also very firmly pro 2nd Amendment?

    • http://www.facebook.com/stephen.dedalus.560 Stephen Dedalus

      Actually, you *can* pick and choose. The Constitution itself provides for provision of the amendments – remember what the word “amendment” means in the first place?

  • Lolzer

    The purpose of the right is so that if ever a tyrannical government is set up, the people can easily oppose it. To limit the use of firearms to simply the military and police would give any tyrant more power.

    The “killing animals turn you into genocidal maniacs” bit is an over generalization. It’s almost like the “violent video games = violent people in real life” theory. Millions of people around the world kill animals for food, sport or safety (killing vermin). It doesn’t turn everybody into serial killers. I’m pretty sure the ratio of “hunters” to “hunters turned serial killers” is extremely sparse.

    Banning probably won’t help. There are probably more guns than people in Switzerland right now and not much violence goes on over there compared to places with stricter gun laws. Much like how marijuana in Holland is legal and not as many people use it.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_M73THX2LLJZJC6V7EBESDSDH4E kijafha

    PS: knives ARE banned in Japan.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_M73THX2LLJZJC6V7EBESDSDH4E kijafha

    PS: knives ARE banned in Japan.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002090676582 Torg Ishere

    Gun-control laws do not control crime because crimes are not committed by guns; they are committed by criminals. Criminals will always have guns because they do not obey laws, including anti-gun laws. Those without guns are easy prey for criminals with guns. Gun control encourages crime.The right to bear arms was included in the Bill of Rights, not to deter crime, but to deter oppressive government. Just governments honor and protect the right to bear arms. Oppressive governments fear and prohibit the right to bear arms.Guns are dangerous. The only thing more dangerous is not having them.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002090676582 Torg Ishere

    Gun-control laws do not control crime because crimes are not committed by guns; they are committed by criminals. Criminals will always have guns because they do not obey laws, including anti-gun laws. Those without guns are easy prey for criminals with guns. Gun control encourages crime.The right to bear arms was included in the Bill of Rights, not to deter crime, but to deter oppressive government. Just governments honor and protect the right to bear arms. Oppressive governments fear and prohibit the right to bear arms.Guns are dangerous. The only thing more dangerous is not having them.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002090676582 Torg Ishere

    Gun-control laws do not control crime because crimes are not committed by guns; they are committed by criminals. Criminals will always have guns because they do not obey laws, including anti-gun laws. Those without guns are easy prey for criminals with guns. Gun control encourages crime.The right to bear arms was included in the Bill of Rights, not to deter crime, but to deter oppressive government. Just governments honor and protect the right to bear arms. Oppressive governments fear and prohibit the right to bear arms.Guns are dangerous. The only thing more dangerous is not having them.

  • Endtimeboogie

    The modern western liberal democracies we take for granted wouldn’t have happened without the great constitutional republic known as the USA. For better or worse the constitution is radical in it’s liberty to the individual, guns are a part of that as much as free speech, its interesting what constitutional right have been protected and which the Federal reserve defiles Article 1 Section 8 about the creation of currency the Patriot Act does the 4th Amendment on search and seizure.
    Still you’ll miss them when there gone. 

    • http://www.facebook.com/jeroen.schippers.77 Jeroen Schippers

      What? Wtf are you talkng about? USA wouldn’t even have existed if it wasn’t for the Spanish, Dutch or British. Somewhere along the line this country lost their European roots and went all hillbilly. That’s the problem.

  • Awhiteha

    I saw this documentary tonite and thought it was full of horse poop. He said, to the guy who can’t defend himself, “Guns don’t kill people bullets do!” Well, then do a documentary on bullets not guns. Do documentary on rocks, knives, crazy people, human hands and other things that kill people. In the comment section I also read that “it is well recognised amongst psychologists and psychiatrists that the enjoyment of killing animals is a key indicator in the development of killers, and especially serial killers” horse puckey! I went to school and got my degree and psychology and realized that it is a screwed up profession full of people with so many problems. They can’t even figure themselve out, about more than 70% of these so called shrinks kill themselves. Even if you ban all the guns in the world people will still invent firearms and other things to kill with and crooks will steal them.

  • Jimmy

    Totally agree with Kate’s comments. Americans are so blinded by their gun culture they fail to see what the number one variable is when it comes to gun deaths.. The ease of access to firearms!! It is amazing, that despite the many massacres they have, they can’t put two and two together and do something about the guns.

  • Brutalsea

    Crooks guns were at one time legally obtained then stolen and on-sold, so if you keep buying guns there’s gonna be more guns to steal and the more guns they steal, the more guns you need to catch ‘em and the more guns there are to catch them, the more guns there are to steal and the more guns there are to steal and the more guns they steal, the more guns you need to catch ‘em……..

  • Joshkaplannyc

    not available 2/17/12

  • Asshole

    The top three reasons for gun ownership are Hunting, Sport shooting, and Self defense – in that order. Buying a gun for the purpose of killing someone is way down at the bottom of the list, and is discouraged even in America. Perhaps we ought to worry more about WHY people want to kill each other than to worry about whatever method they choose to do it, but that’s just my point of view and I’m an asshole.
    Even Norway’s stringent laws on gun ownership didn’t stop Anders Breivik, just one tragic example of many others.
    When civilian gun ownership is criminalized, only criminals, wealthy people, and politicians will have guns. You will only succeed in taking them away from responsible, law-abiding people.

    • http://www.facebook.com/jeroen.schippers.77 Jeroen Schippers

      It is so funny to see that every american tries desperately to justify their insane gun fixation. Breivik is the only and first example of someone in Norway killing people with a gun, whilst in the US it is daily business. I was born and raised in the Netherlands and moved to Dubai, does this also make me a terrorist now? I have never seen or touched a gun and yet I have never been robbed or physically abused. How is that possible? Because the world isn’t like the US. Too bad US citizens do not travel and see this for themselves.

      • bad motherfucker

        Gun violence is only a serious issue in cities, and that’s the case even in countries where citizens don’t have legal access to guns.
        I’ve never been robbed or physically abused either, and I’ve traveled around the world. I don’t know where you come up with these generalizations from.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZR2WVCTS2ZJYQD6QKI55FVUIM yahoo-IZR2WVCTS2ZJYQD6QKI55FVUIM

    I forgot who said it so I apologize for not giving credit.

    Guns don’t kill people – people kill people – and so do monkeys if you give them guns.

  • Herbin Flamez

    Anything can be used as a tool for destruction or taking a life….guns just happen to be one of the many tools that take less energy from the user as a quicker means to an end of someone or something else…..Hunting for food and protecting community or nation was what the gun was originally created for… but for the small balled lazy ass loitering the streets that have no real fighting skills to settle an issue or dispute with their fellow man are the ones who need to have a stronger more controlled access. In fact vehicles, baseball bats. tire irons, knives. poisons, cigarettes. cancers and other diseases caused by GMO foods, animal bites and drugs all kill and take more lives individually in any given year than guns do…. People use the gun as just one of many tools to obtain the affect of destruction either for purposes of survival or simply for a selfish reasoning to steal another persons life….Fact is; guns won’t matter to nuclear or chemical bombs being dropped on you…..nor will guns keep you safe from a foreign army occupation. Its all an illusion of safety…..but to each his/her own. In the same breath. a citizenry with no right to bear arms is a society in a state of controlled slavery.

  • Karl Marksmann

    The only reason why american criminals have guns in the first place is because they can get them from the people who obtained them legally. If there weren’t a bunch of guns in the first place, you wouldn’t have so many armed criminals and you wouldn’t need a 2nd ammendment, concealed weapons permits or any of that bullshit. Having a large city with no gun-violence is like a fantasy to the gun-nut, lik “omg how do you keep the peace without arming everyone”.
    If you made a graph, I’d be pretty sure you could say the dumber people are, the more guns they think they need. OBAMA IS COMING FOR UR GUNS! DUCK AND COVER!