Crime tends to be down where people carry guns. I live in an area where everybody has guns and we don't have a lot of crime compared to some places. Citizens need to be armed but need to be educated about arms and keep them in safe places away from children.
2006-07-10 18:58:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by Elwood 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
No one should have guns. No one has that right to take another's life like that. But in the world that we live in I still say that the less guns there are the better. That means that only cops (and bad guys if you insist) should get guns, and civilians shouldn't put themselves at risk or lower themselves to the same level as the bad guys, by having guns.
2006-07-10 19:02:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by Some Guy 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
i you a gun to protect my self i carry it every day at work i deliver pizza it is a colt 45 1911 i have had 4 or 5 people try to rob me and had my car stolen once the people that work with me have had smiler incidents anybody that thinks that only cops should have guns are crazy cops cant protect you stuff happens very fast by the time they get there you would be dead and the criminal would be long gone with your stuff and if somebody comes into my house and try to take my stuff or try to kill me i have a Sten mk2 sub machine gun i don't need the cops help did you read some of the other people answerer's sounds like thy would rather die than fight back they are crazy
2006-07-10 20:48:48
·
answer #3
·
answered by MIKE B 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I personally think that every house should have a gun. The problem lies with having responsible adults. I was raised around guns and know how handle and respect them. When I buy a new gun I learn about it and target practice with it so that I know all about how it handles. Also take all the necessary precautions for storage and educate my children as well.
2006-07-10 19:01:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It amazes me that the same people that complained about governments response to Katrina, would trust government to protect them.
The average response time in Los Angeles is 15 minutes. In my state it can take upwards of thirty minutes for a deputy to respond. It takes thirty seconds for a person to bleed out.
Then factor in animal attacks. We have had bicyclists attacked by mountain lions. I don't want to fight off a mountain lion with a knife let alone my bare hands.
The Founders would be appalled at such a concept because private ownership was another check and balance, keeping the federal government at bay.
2006-07-13 18:48:14
·
answer #5
·
answered by .45 Peacemaker 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Theoretically you have the right to protect yourself. However, practically speaking, a gun in the house is a really bad idea. It's an especially bad idea if you have kids in the house. Just look at the statistics.
2006-07-10 18:57:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by Dave R 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
there is nothing wrong with guns. They are tools used for albeit few uses, but among them is recreation and survival. Guns are tools much like a knife, fire and confidence. Any of these can be useful or damaging. If we are to protect ourselves from the potentially damaging effects of guns we must educate ourselves and those around us of there uses, and when it is appropriate to use them. Maybe most importantly how to respect them. There is a saying: "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."
2006-07-10 19:33:15
·
answer #7
·
answered by thomas a 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
No the opposite is the case. Public mass shootings occur most frequently at locations where guns are banned. Such as schools. At those locations the shooters can be assured there will be large numbers of unarmed victims, and no armed citizens to stop you. Gun control isn't about guns its about control.
2016-03-15 22:29:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I am an NYC born liberal, but I think the right to bear arms is just as important as our freedom of speech; we must be able to defend ourselves from danger, should the need arise.
What i do disagree with is the manufacture or assault weapons, not because a law abiding citizen shouldn't have one, but that a criminal will not...you do not need an uzi to shoot a prowler, or a drunken attacker.
By the way, if you have a gun in your home and you are not a trained marksman, I advise that you shoot to kill...because if you aim to injure and miss, you put yourself and your family at risk; if someone enters my home without my leave, I believe he forfeits his rights, and I should be free to do as I must to protect my home and loved ones.
2006-07-10 19:38:03
·
answer #9
·
answered by taishar68 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you are living in NY =P well seriously it's not wrong to protect yourself and your loved ones but a gun is not the best solution.. it can be dangerous and someone might get hurt by accident..
2006-07-10 20:41:29
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋