Should guns be banned in America?

Question

Its WAAAAAAAAY too easy to get your hands on one and its WAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too easy to harm someone with it! Guns are the stupidest inventions to mankind!! All they accomplish is a power trip.

Answer 1

I second you on this completely. I see no benefit to having a gun. Lets take Iceland for example, they continue to remain the most peaceful country in the world, and guess what, even the cops dont carry guns.

I guess its a question of power. Some senior authorities and politicians see bombing and war as power, and i guess as it goes down, guns are considered powerful for common people.

sigh!

Answer 2

I prefer guns to explosives which kill a lot more innocent bystanders. If you get rid of guns, hand-made explosives will be the replacement weapon of choice for many criminals. That is a road we don't want to go down. Now instead of a building having a few windows shot out, it gets firebombed and everyone in it dies. That is not an improvement.

Think it's hard to build a bomb? Give me a car battery and some chemicals you use in your swimming pool, and I can take out a building. And that's without doing any serious research or trying anything fancy. Do you really want that to become the norm?

P.S. I love the suggestion one person had for legalizing swords and duels. It actually follows the same logic - that every society has a violent side that needs an outlet to be controlled. The narrower that outlet is, the better. And frankly, how quickly would gang turf-wars be resolved if the leaders knew they'd be called to defend their actions or lose face at the point of a sword? Awesome.

Answer 3

I say we ban guns and legalize swords.

Guns require nearly no skill to operate. If you have an arm, then chances are you can kill someone with a gun.

Swords on the other hand require some level of skill to wield. Now I'm not saying we let just any idiot run the streets waving about a sword, but I think swords would be a better way to handle disputes than guns and gang violence.

If we made it legal to challenge a person to a duel, it could hardly be considered murder. Each person would have an equal chance, and the one with greater skill would win.

I'm sorry if I sound like a crazy violent person, but I personally think America has become too weak. We give people too much freedom, and that's why so many people are overweight and weak.

Answer 4

The Constitution says NO to your idea.

Your pseudo-moral superiority is WAAAAAAAAAY to melodramatic!!!

Guns are not a problem. There has never been a gun yet that could, on it's own, shoot someone. Guns don't kill people, You and I kill people.

You cannot ban human nature. If there were no guns people would use knives, or rocks, or clubs, or whatever else is at hand. Do you think you could ban rocks, clubs and knives also? Most murder is domestic. One family member loses control and kills another. It has been this way since Eden was closed and will be this way until the Second Coming of Christ.

Answer 5

No! We wouldn't have a ban on guns. it is our 2d change correct! Will the police officials, and military get to save them if there's a ban on guns? If that answer is 'definite', then Ha! Hell no on that! What we favor to do is placed any skill gun proprietor by a rigorous bunch of assessments and historic past assessments. Delve large deep into the guy's existence. go away no stone unturned to make certain all their options, gripes, lawsuits, puppy peeves, or any anger topics. We provide them a one thousand question try and re-be conscious a number of the inquiries to make certain in the experience that they answer truly a similar question diverse strategies. Then, and easily then, can we be able to be pretty dang particular that the skill gun vendors are in charge and sensible sufficient to have them or no longer. We also might want to do a similar with the present gun vendors. we favor to inform the nutjobs like Lanza, Roberts, Holmes, Loughner, and so on "Hell no you won't be able to have a gun. you're too f'd up contained in the top." We then deliver them kicking and screaming into the nearest nut abode.

Answer 6

Well, you're going to have people pointing to the Second Amendment on this question. As a law student, I think it's important that I set the record straight: Americans do not have a Constitutional right to bear arms per the US Supreme Court(U.S. v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)).

I've written an article on the issue: http://searchwarp.com/swa65229.htm

Here is the holding of the US Supreme Court in Miller: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=307&invol=174


As for my personal feelings, I like shotguns for hunting purposes. Where I live, it's important that hunting takes place, otherwise we have too many deer and other wild-life becomes endangered and the number of car accidents goes way up. But with handguns, well, handguns are made for killing humans, nothing else. So I agree, handguns aren't good. But, we have to consider that a criminal is a criminal. They're a criminal because they break the law. If someone is willing to shoot someone, why wouldn't that same person be willing to make his/her own gun or buy one off the black market? I don't like guns, but I understand the reasons for keeping them legal (including personal defense, such that if a criminal knows guns are illegal, he is more likely to break into a house since he won't be shot, which might actually mean more people buy guns. In fact, I've heard many many people say they'd buy a gun if owning guns became illegal simply because of this reason). On the surface I agree with you, but in the end I'm not sure how much good it would do.

Keep in mind, the US Constitution is not relevant to this question, since the US Supreme Court has ruled that in order for a weapon to be protected under the Second Amendment, the weapon must provide for the defense of the nation. Go to the links I provided for a better understanding. Still, I have to disagree with what you're proposing simply because the criminals will still own guns. They break the laws anyway, what's one more?

Answer 7

What about hunting? The other idea behind the right to bear arms is that should the government become corrupt the American people would have a way of fighting back with force if needed. However, I do agree that it is too easy for people to gain access to guns.

Answer 8

One statement here that just seems to never get thru
When guns are outlawed--only outlaws will have guns

People that don't give a rat about the law are not going to obey this law either and so all the good people will be at the mercy of the criminal element even moreso than today and that ain't good

Answer 9

Gun control does not work, Its pretty simple to understand.
If you make guns illegal do you really expect criminals to turn over all their guns? of course not, so now the only civilians left with guns are criminals.
Lets look at it from the other side, if you are a criminal, are you more likely to break into a house of a gun owner or a non-gun owner?
A gun is a tool nothing more.
Violence was around a long time before gun powder

Answer 10

No, that'd be stupid. There are too many gun's around as it is, to make a law banning gun's would only hurt the citizen's who uphold the law. Gun's will still be readily available to the criminals who didn't care about law's to begin with. It won't help anything..

I will agree with the power trip statement comment though...