Should we the American people be forced to surrender our guns? Would it make us any safer? I am againt gun control I just like to see poeple's opinions.
2006-09-22 08:47:46 · 31 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Heck no. Outlawing them won't help; you don't need a gun to kill someone. Besides, whenever something is not allowed, it is more desired. And I think their should be more safety control issues instilled by the ones the kids learn the most from: their parents.
2006-09-22 08:58:55 · answer #1 · answered by sybertyger86 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is a case where, I suspect, most of the opposition to gun control, comes from conscientious gun owners, who know how to own a gun. But the problem really lies with those people buying the old .38, loading it & sticking it next to the bed - people who make no effort to learn safety.
IMO - the second amendment does NOT say anywhere that an individual has the right to own or carry a gun. It says "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.". This is certainly open to interpretation. But as a whole, the right to keep & bear arms is tied to "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State".
Furthermore I would whether "the people" refers to a group of people or to individuals. It might be said that "the people" refers to some sort a "well regulated Militia" and not to the general public at all.
Bottom line - I'd like to live in a gun-free society, but I don't. I live in South Phoenix - not as bad as it used to be. But I know that the cops won't get here in time, if I dial 911, so that's why I have my Glock & I go to the range regularly to practise.
2006-09-22 08:56:40 · answer #2 · answered by dryheatdave 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Firearms should not be outlawed because of the theory that allowed them to be owned. People need the right to defend themselves from criminals, terrorists, and even their own government. The government is made up of humans, who can easily let their power go to their heads. A possible explanation to why we have the second amendment is that the founding fathers feared a government similar to the unjust English government (at the time). If we weren't allowed to have guns then, we would still be struggling with that government today. Same goes for the present.
Good question!
2006-09-22 09:11:12 · answer #3 · answered by c90 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't like guns, but I think Americans without histories of violent crime should be able to own them. Requiring registration is not a problem, I think.
When the local corrupt cop wants to bend or break the law and enter a citizen's house without cause, I want that officer to consider that the citizen on the other side of the door may be lawfully armed and ready to deal with an illegal intruder. Guns help keep the 'honest' officials honest...! The founders of the nation knew this.
2006-09-22 09:04:58 · answer #4 · answered by kurtrisser 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Guns are tools, neither good or evil. It is the actions of the person using the tool that is good or evil.
Cars kill 3 to 4 times more people than guns every year.
Humans were murdering each other with rocks, sticks, and swords for millennium before guns were invented.
If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. Then how are we supposed to protect ourselves?
The Declaration of Independence states "...That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government...". How could we do that if the government is the only ones with guns?
2006-09-22 08:55:28 · answer #5 · answered by Aegis of Freedom 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No way Sherlock and if they do there would be some real trouble here in the states---- they need to enforce the laws we have and let law abiding citizens keep their guns as a token of appreciation that we have been good citizens -------- the rest who aren't good citizens should not be allowed to carry a gun for any reason whatsoever and should not have access to any type of public aid or be able to vote --------- it sound tuff but it would stop a lot of this crap we are spending money that could be better spent on education and health issues ----- crimanals would be at the end of my food chain and they would be on the chain gang earning their keep or starve---------
2006-09-22 09:04:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If we outlaw guns will all the criminals give up their guns?No.We have alot of laws that get broke every day,this would be no different.That would only put guns in the hands of the people that should have them the least.It would NOT make us safer,it would make us alot less safe.Gun control is hitting the bad guy!!! The ONLY people for this so called "gun control" are commies...
2006-09-22 09:02:03 · answer #7 · answered by Anthony 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. The bad guys would still be able to get guns, and it would give local law enforcement and the military an unfair advantage. If anything we should push for responsible gun ownership, ie- requiring safety courses whenever you buy ANY sort of gun. Currently (depending on the state) anyone can walk into Walmart and order a shotgun regardless of whether they know how to use it or not. THAT scares me a bit, but I'm not against gun ownership overall.
2006-09-22 08:59:09 · answer #8 · answered by my brain hurts 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I, for one, would like to see guns banned except for police and military. They kill way more innocent people than they save, and that isn't partisan, its a fact. Not too mention there are tons of statistics that show increases in violent crimes, death rates, domestic violence, suicides, etc. when guns are prevalent.
Many people argue that it's for self defense. But if no one had a gun, then why would you need one for protection? Additionally, a hand gun's only purpose is to kill other humans, so why have them?
2006-09-22 08:54:32 · answer #9 · answered by quickblur 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No.
If the people aren't allowed to own guns it puts the military in a much stronger position for taking over the government.
2006-09-22 08:51:49 · answer #10 · answered by Sean 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋