Should Guns be banned in usa ? R they the main source of violence ?

Answer 1

I definitely think they should be. Guns are made for one thing and one thing only and that is to kill. My personal opinion is that they should shut down all the gun manufacturers in the country. Of course they are the main source of violence because it encourages people to buy them and most likely use them for violent acts. It gives them the confidence to commit crimes because they know people are more submissive if you threaten them with death. If you cannot control yourself or are intending on violating the law then having a gun only makes the situation more volatile. It gives a person too much power to own a gun. If you get rid of guns you prevent deaths resulting from gunshot wounds. Simple common sense. If people weren't so ignorant or opressed then we wouldn't feel even the need to own a firearm. People are so paranoid these days and that is a very sad thing. We should not have to protect ourselves from one another. If we could only understand that some things are just wrong to do then our society would probably be less violent. We as a society have brought up our children in world filled with hate and aggression so much so that they are desensitized to it all and that's why we have people who grow up to be murderers and violent criminals. One day hopefully the ideals of Martin Luther King and Ghandi will be realized and I'm sure abolishing the use of guns or better yet the destruction of them won't hurt the cause. It may just bring us closer to a more enlightened civilization.

Answer 2

From my Cold Dead Hand. We have the right to bear arms. Violence is caused by people not guns. My guns make sure no one gets violent with me.

I bet all these people who are saying that guns should be banned would keep their opinons to themselves if we all still carried sidearms and held people accountable for their actions. They are also the first ones to scream help when something doesnt go their way. They want someone else to to solve the problem for them, but lets take the guns away so its that much harder to uphold justice. And for the guy who said our for-farthers didnt realize the problems that would be created by the constitution, well thats just B.S.!!!!!!!!!! Imagine where your ignorant family tree would have ended if it wasn't for the constitution. Our for-farthers protected peoples rights with firearms and the world is still being protected by firearms. Lets pick an Island and stick all these anti-arms people there and see how they last. It would at least make a great new reality T.V. show.

Answer 3

NO guns aren't the main source of violence. Stupidity is. People don't want/can't come up with a better solution than shooting someone/thing so they grab the easiest weapon they can to make their point. Unless you want to ban stupidity, I don't think banning weapons will work.
I do think the penalties should be more severe however, for gun carelessness. Ex: a parent leaves his gun out, and child plays with it and gets killed.
Parents should be held responsible for the actions of their minor children where guns are concerned.

Answer 4

Banning guns would be like banning someone who bought a defected car. Guns are only dangerous in the hands of bad people.

I do not think they should be banned. The constitution says we have the right to bear arms (I feel that way only in defense of myself.)

The main source of violence is people who misuse their "power" with a gun.

Answer 5

I believe more people die by doctor's mistakes every year than by gun violence. Remember if a person is a criminal they are going to get guns illegally. We have so many gun regulations that are not enforced so more laws are not needed. The main source of violence is people; so is a stabbing a non violent act?

Answer 6

No.

Guns are not the main source of violence - people are. You wanna ban them in the USA??

Answer 7

No. If the issue is violence, then a gun ban would only render law abiding citizens defenseless against criminals. As the old adage goes, if you outlaw guns, then only outlaws will have guns.

People need to remember that we are a free society. Freedom carries with it a price. Freedom means that the police can't enter our homes without a warrant and tell us what to do. A part of this freedom is having the ability and responsibility to protect ourselves.

Some will say, that they have a right to be free of violence. These people are confusing freedom with security. Benjamin Franklin said "those who are willing to sacrifice liberty for security are entitled to neither." In other words, freedom has to be earned. If you want to be free, then you must accept responsibility for your own well being, including your own self defense. If you expect the government to provide you with security, then you will need to have the government watch over you constantly, and in so doing you will surrender your civil liberties. And once you surrender your civil liberties, you will no longer be secure.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. Make a choice. Do you want to be free and accept the responsibility for your own security, or do you want to live in a Soviet style police state?

As an American, I choose to be free. Please pass the ammo.

Answer 8

i have self assurance that the u . s . shouldn't ban guns. we've a excellent to guard ourselves even as someone who carrys a gun trys to kill. It has not something to do with guns. The guns are literally not the problem. what's out of control is that folk who're mentally unwell do not get the help they prefer so that they bypass out and purchase a gun. The undesirable area is that the assessments they do for paying for a gun would not arise that she or he's psychological unwell and that i say a number of them have sparkling information. My concepts are fairly of banning guns in u . s . they love to do a list examine that includes docs. I strongly propose before someone can purchase a gun legally they ought to have a written statement says that they are bodily and mentally in a position to have a gun and are freed from any psychological ailments. in the adventure that they have got a psychological ailment then by using regulation they won't be able to have a gun. i don't recognize if this can help lots of the problem with capturing massacares, notwithstanding it ought to diminish who can and who can not have a gun.

Answer 9

No. Guns have been around a lot longer than violence on tv, movies, and video games. Let's try getting rid of those before the firearms.

On a side note. There are three places that I've always been treated with kindness and respect; home, church, and the gun range.

Answer 10

What a novel question, indeed.

Actually, instead of banning guns why not mandate college educations. Considering the high rate of violence among uneducated people, one might consider this as a more sensible alternative.

Answer 11

Guns will never be banned because of the "right to bear arms"

This is the old debate of "do guns kill or people"

Taking guns away won't curve violence. People can use knives, rocks, pipes, whatever. It's not the gun that is the problem

Don't take away my right to defend myself.