you seem to agree with me that gun control will only increase gun violence at this point in time and for generations to come.
I'm afraid I disagree with that. Getting rid of practically all guns in your society might
increase gun violence in the short term (e.g. if one criminal gang is disarmed, a rival gang might take the oppurtunity to attack them). But it would definitely not increase gun violence for generations to come. How could it?
Ineffective gun control laws might make things worse in the long-term. But successfully
ridding America of guns could only reduce gun crime. I'm assuming that there is a way to successfully disarm America. You're assuming that there isn't. We'll have to agree to disagree on that point, because neither of us can be certain.
what if your plan doesnt work and were still confronted with gun violence 100s of years from now?
Well if a team of experts were to define a much better plan (I'm no expert), then it seems that if you were still confronted with gun violence in 100 years time, it wouldn't be as extreme as it is now. I certainly think that gun violence could be greatly reduced if guns were no longer made or sold to the public, and if huge efforts were made to try and disarm criminals. Even if gun crime only went down very slightly, that's still something. 29,999 deaths is better than 30,000.
my short term solution is to provide protection for the students and faculty
i view them as important for the future of my country. people should seek to prevent them from harm in the present and in the future.
But a short-term solution is just that: short-term. It keeps the problem under some control, but it doesn't make it go away. Wouldn't it be better to do what it takes to bring gun violence right down, so that future generations of students and academics are almost entirely safe from gun violence?
If the campus faculty were armed, Cho would only have killed, say, those first two people. But if there was no such thing as a gun shop, then Cho wouldn't even have killed the first two people, because he would never have bought a gun.
i also disagree with your support for gun free zones.
I never expressed support for gun free zones. Gun free zones imply zones where guns are allowed, and I do not think that guns should be allowed anywhere. Your whole country should be a gun-free zone.
and anti gun policies have never proven to deter crime.
There have never been anti-gun policies of the sort that I am putting forward. "No guns anywhere ever" is not a policy that you've tried out. It could work - you don't know yet.
you should strive to end all types violence whether that be guns, knives, or sporting equipment.
the only commonality is the all violence is commited by a violent person.
Every human being is potentially a violent person. We are all potential criminals, in that we are capable of committing crimes under the right circumstances.
i say violent people are the root of all violence.
Why do you think 'violent people' are violent?