# FILE NAME: 00002066.soc
# TITLE: Should people be allowed to buy and own guns for self-defence? [e960ec656ba09cf581c9dc5acf154ddc]
# DESCRIPTION: 
# DATA TYPE: soc
# MODIFICATION TYPE: original
# RELATES TO: 
# RELATED FILES: 
# PUBLICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# MODIFICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# NUMBER ALTERNATIVES: 4
# NUMBER VOTERS: 5
# NUMBER UNIQUE ORDERS: 5
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 1: Statement 1 - No, people should not be allowed to buy and own guns for self-defence. If guns were banned, the crime rate would decrease as there would be less guns to use in crime. If guns were banned, people would not need to defend themselves as they would not be worried about someone else having a gun. The UK banned guns after the Dunblane Massacre and since then gun crime dramatically declined. The same happened with Australia when they banned guns. If guns are readily available, I can see the impulse towards gun ownership for self-defence. However, I think governments should be strict with gun laws. At the very minimum, it should be very hard to meet the criteria for legal gun ownership. Even better, all guns should be illegal except for law enforcement and other very specific exceptions.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 2: Statement 2 - I don't think we should be able to have guns because if we did, people would abuse that power and do things they shouldn't. The way the law works in Australia is we are allowed to own guns but they must be locked up and secure in a gun safe at all times. This rule works well for hunters who use their guns to hunt for game, but the system would be open to abuse if guns were just available to anyone, especially people with violent tendencies.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 3: Statement 3 - People should not be allowed to buy and own guns for self-defence. This is because if all guns were banned, you would not need to defend yourself as you would not worry about someone else having a gun to defend yourself against to begin with. The gun victim crime rate is to high to warrant this law. If you look at countries were guns are banned, their rate of fatality is much much lower. The participants had to debate a question and reach a consensus. Each of them took the time to express their view, which was then deliberated and discussed. After much deliberation, they reached a consensus view which none of them necessarily agreed with, but all of them could at least tolerate. They reached this consensus view through deliberation, negotiation, and discussion.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 4: Statement 4 - In general, the group was opposed to the idea of people being allowed to buy and own guns for self-defence. The group thought that this would lead to an increase in gun crime, and that if guns were banned, people would be just as safe, if not safer. The group thought that the best way to reduce gun crime was to ban guns.
1: 1,3,2,4
1: 1,4,3,2
1: 1,2,3,4
1: 1,4,2,3
1: 1,2,4,3