English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

why is it that the American goverment allows civils to have weapons ??? , have they not heard about all the crazies which posses them and had even kill at the American schools ??? .

i do not think the police should used them either unless they are 100 percent sure they are dealing whit a very dangerous person which would obviously would not have a weapon if he wasn't allow to have it in the first place .

2006-07-19 15:23:14 · 21 answers · asked by game over loves evanescence 6 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

sorry i forgot to add that anyone does not include those which are in obvious danger such as the soldiers in iraq

2006-07-19 15:26:53 · update #1

jenny n if a crazy trows a stone to the sky he wold only hurt himself just like the stupid who spits at the sky but if the crazy is given a weapon and shoots to the sky not only he can get hurt but a huge number of person who might even be miles away from him .

2006-07-19 15:33:18 · update #2

mm i said i am not talking about the militia , by the way was the war in vietnan broug down whit weapons ???.

2006-07-19 15:42:23 · update #3

21 answers

I'm surprised no one has mentioned hunting yet. I guess no one hunts for food anymore. Meh....

Unfortunately, the fact remains that people will be able to get their hands on weapons regardless of whether or not the government allows it. At least making it legal allows them to place more legal restrictions on how weapons such as guns can be bought and sold (although there should be more restrictions in my opinion).

I grew up with MacGyver as a role model, though. One time he was in a situation in which there was no option to use other than a gun, but he hit the guy over the head with it instead of shooting. To me, that was very admirable.

Perhaps there should be more public education as to how people can defend themselves and keep themselves safer so they'll be less likely to get into situations where they'd feel the need for a gun to protect themselves. There should at least be some kind of test people have to pass before they can legally own one - including details about how the gun functions and to make sure they are mentally capable of possessing a gun responsibly.

Regardless of any arguments against weapons, though, there are too many people who feel they need them for the government to put a ban on them. It's similar to the nuclear weapons countries have to intimidate other countries, even when they have no real intention of using them. Yes, it's very dangerous, but that's what makes some people feel safe.

2006-07-20 06:03:55 · answer #1 · answered by Flif 7 · 20 6

Owning a weapon doesn't mean anyone is playing God.

Our forefathers were quite clear on this.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Had the people not been able to bear arms, we likely would not have ever thrown out the British in the first place.

I think they also knew that by allowing the people to bear arms, our government could never be certain that it could have sufficient power to prevent the people from having the ability to control the government if needed.

And if you think the people don't control the government, just remember that we took to the streets once before and brought down a little war in Vietnam.

2006-07-19 15:38:43 · answer #2 · answered by mmillerct@sbcglobal.net 2 · 0 0

The reason The U.S. Constitution allows for the citizens of The United States to own weapons is for protection from government. It is also wise to be able to defend yourself from " all the crazies which posses them and had even kill at the American schools." Taking away the right to own a gun will not stop violence. "The crazies" will not just lay their guns down because the law has changed. I will never give up my gun. If anyone breaks into my home, they had better be wearing a Teflon vest, because I'm going to throw lead at them until they stop walking. I won't shoot to kill if I don't have to, but if they are armed, say goodnight Irene. The whole thing comes down to education. By calling a gun a bad thing to children, and not teaching them the proper handling of it, children become curious of them. If you decide to have a gun in a house with a child, you have to be willing to teach that child the right way to handle a gun as well as the wrong way.

2006-07-19 15:38:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Spoken like a true naive passivist who knows little of human nature.

If you are victim of a home intrusion and violent crime, you may just change your tune a bit. You would be quite happy to have a weapon to defend yourself against the predators of society.

Go for the head shot. Yours will be the only version of events the police will hear. The coroner can take away the garbage.

2006-07-19 15:49:10 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

it is not playing GOD. GOD never needed guns or weapons .
It is being ignorant and guns don;t kill...Bullets do. There are so many people who use weapons and it is difficult to know who they all are , I feel if there were a law that no one has weapon unless it is authorized . the crazies as you say would find other ways of killing, so what can be done? it is a never ending story.
It will never be solved...

2006-07-19 15:41:51 · answer #5 · answered by StarShine G 7 · 0 0

Someone will always own a weapon. Shall we outlaw them so that only the law abiding citizen is defenceless. The lawbreakers will always have guns no matter what the law says.

Currently it is our constitutional right. In fact, it was given to us in case our own government became completely corrupt. We have a right to protect ourselves. Think about it. Laws are not made to keep the just in line. They are there to protect the just from the criminal

2006-07-19 15:31:18 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

First, MY constitution gives me the right to own a gun. If you don't like that stay wherever you are.

Second, if someone breaks into your house to steal your property or rape your wife or harm your kids you'd thank God that you had the gun to protect you and your family.

Third, if the government were to take all guns from legal gun owners are you really naive enough to think that criminals will not have guns. That's exactly what we need criminals knowing you don't have a gun and can't protect yourself.

Don't hate what you don't understand.

2006-07-19 15:32:55 · answer #7 · answered by Nuke Lefties 4 · 0 0

the right to bear arms is still in existence. what about the people at home with their families and an intruder threatens to take their lives. do they not have the right to pull out a firearm to defend their family and home? maybe a person just needs to feed his family and uses a gun for hunting purposes. although i do understand your thinking, you should consider times when a weapon may be used as it was intended.

2006-07-19 15:42:35 · answer #8 · answered by melissa m 2 · 0 0

First you ask if it's ok to play god if you own a weapon, then you say civilians shouldn't have them.
If only cops and the military have guns, that's called a police state.
Individuals have a right to protect themselves.

2006-07-19 17:05:36 · answer #9 · answered by sister_godzilla 6 · 0 0

I have several guns - I do not play God with them - but I will not let anyone else play God on me. Ever wonder why the American soil has not been invaded? One of the reasons is simply this - America has the means to protect itself.

GUNS ARE NOT BAD - IT IS THE USER THAT IS BAD! TAKE THE GUN AWAY - AND I WILL KILL YOU WITH MY AXE. DEAD IS DEAD - YOU CANNOT PIN DEATH ON THE GUN BUT THE GUN TOTER.

2006-07-19 15:33:18 · answer #10 · answered by Gladiator 5 · 0 0

I carry a weapon and I am not a God.You take away guns and people will still kill each other. So what's your point?

2006-07-19 15:42:28 · answer #11 · answered by bulldog 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers