some wanted to out law gun ownership,but the second amendment to the U.S constitution says;..the right of the people to keep and bear arms .shall not be infinged'no one wants to be a dictator of a nation with 2oo million guns around.
2006-08-11 15:26:14 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Adolph Hitler proudly proclaimed that Germany (under the 3rd Reich) was the first civilized nation in the world where private ownership of firearms was unnecessary and was therefore abolished. We all know where things went from there.
Say. "Mel T" -- Most European nations have NOT outlawed privately held firearms. Britain has largely banned them, except for the .22, and major crimes, mostly drug-related, have greatly increased. Australia has found the same thing, that the police alone are powerless to protect law-abiding unarmed citizens..
2006-08-11 15:32:59 · answer #1 · answered by senior citizen 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are correct. But, why is it a big deal? Armed people mean nothing. The US Civil War established that the Federal Gov't calls the shots. Today, the Federal Gov't is a little better organized than in the 1860's, so I doubt that the concept of an armed citizenry being a check on unjust gov't actions, is truly worth arguing about The Confederacy lost, so I doubt that people with hunting rifles will take on tanks and gunships. As for crime, well you can own a shotgun almost anywhere. There isn't a better short range weapon.
2006-08-11 15:48:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
European countries have outlawed guns and had a great deal of success lowering the murder rate. However, I believe our right to bear arms is to grant us the right to rise up against the government should it get out of control. (Let's leave the Bush argument to other threads). I think this is very important. What's to stop a President or Prime Minister from taking over the country unless the citizens are also armed? One day, this may not be a question, but today it still is.
2006-08-11 15:30:42 · answer #3 · answered by MEL T 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
During the Revolution, we would not have won it if we were without arms. The Muslim terrorists would gladly take over this country, except the American people are so heavily armed that they dare not get into a hand in hand fight. With armed citizens, tyrants and others are kept in check.
2006-08-11 15:33:50 · answer #4 · answered by Lonely Soul 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Gun control, is HITTING what you aim at!!! But, seriously, i'm really afraid it might come to that!!! The government trying to take our guns, i mean. We are LOSING our constitutional rights, a little at a time!!
2006-08-11 16:02:53 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
When you disarm the citizens, the criminals get their own guns and the law abiding citizen has no means of defense. It would be very wrong.
2006-08-11 15:30:57 · answer #6 · answered by purplewings123 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nothing, the people who cannot have guns will get sharp sticks and poke us all in the eye.
SGT BIKE A BOOB it is called a correlation, not causation- it is not a black and white issue
2006-08-11 15:30:25 · answer #7 · answered by Sherry L 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Gun control is keeping your aim straight, nuff said.
2006-08-11 15:29:06 · answer #8 · answered by eatmorec11h17no3 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Slavery.
(Oh, and gun control is being able to hit your target. Multiple times.)
2006-08-11 15:31:10 · answer #9 · answered by yo_momma_is_sweet 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In canada, it is illegal for a citizen to possess a weapon. Check their crime rate statistics...much lower than the U.S....must be some kinda connection.
2006-08-11 15:29:57 · answer #10 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋