"I would like your views on should we be allowed to own a gun?"
The quick answer to your question is "Yes. The individual right to defend against serious and violent physical aggression has long-standing recognition throughout the world."
Once upon a time, young Americans learned that English constables didn't carry guns like American law enforcement officers. And that led many Americans to think that England was a safer place than many parts of the U.S.
Of course, that was even as they ignored the apples and oranges comparisons: Like the population of the U.K. is about 60 million people, of which 50 million live in England, while the U.S. is home to about five times that at 300 million. And the U.K. government has a largely paternalistic history with its people whereas the U.S. government had-- until recent decades-- a largely individualistic history. And that when the IRA is militarily active the English have homegrown terrorists that are far more difficult to handle than the few the U.S. has generated.
But nobody suggests the U.K. is really immune from violence anymore-- since you can find English law enforcement officers toting MP-5s in Heathrow Airport and there are far more armed officers and military personnel posted throughout the U.K. these days. (And I'm not counting the combat and surveillance helicopters in Northern Ireland.)
The simple fact is that some human beings are not above doing harm to others. And that those who might be harmed wish to exercise their long-standing right to self-defense by carrying an effective means to defend themselves should neither be much of a surprise nor be prevented by those who are willing to let other people safeguard them-- often unsuccessfully.
The U.S.-- with its individualistic history-- does seem to have an overabundance of "gun nuts" who can't help frothing at the mouth about their "god-given" and "constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms." But the nuttiness aside, is the content of their main message really that unreasonable? Don't individuals have the right to defend themselves from serious violent physical aggression using an effective means to do so?
I'd suggest that despite the cultural differences between the U.K. and the U.S. there still exists a basic agreement about the fundamental rights of humankind. And that's largely why our two nations are friends even after you guys tried to keep us subjugated as one of Her Majesty's colonies....
Cheers
2006-10-12 05:10:31
·
answer #1
·
answered by ParaNYC 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't want to give up my gun, or my right to own one, however, something HAS to change. Its not just illegally acquired guns that are being used in crimes. Half the school shootings are done by kids that get ahold of their parent's legally owned guns that were either not locked up, or the kids knew how to get into the safe. I think that part of the problem is that shooting people is so glorified and 'run of the mill' on TV and in movies, but banning violence in media can't be the answer either because of free speech rights. There is no easy answer. Is there such a thing as too much freedom??
2006-10-10 02:12:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by debean75 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
WHY?! What Do You Want A Gun For, Just Reading Some Of The Answers Here Should Give You Some Idea Of The Mentality Of Those Who Have The Right To Bear Arms.
A Better Question Would Be When Are The Americans Going To Ban The Owning Of All Firearms!
2006-10-10 02:02:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by Paul R 5
·
0⤊
4⤋
Absolutely! Why should you have to stand there and be raped, robbed or murdered because you have no tool to defend yourself? These anti-gun sissies who say to negotiate with a rapist are out of their minds. A rapist is usually a killer after he rapes you. Muggers, burglars and other malcontents are potentially murderers because they have shown no respect for the law or for you as a citizen.
Owning any firearm is a test of responsibilty. An adult should be allowed this responsibilty. A child or an incompetent should not. When a government says "You, Mr. Citizen, cannot own a gun because we don't trust you with one," you are as a child in their eyes. Are you a child at age 30? Age 50? Governments which espouse gun control think so. "Gun control" isn't about controlling guns or crime. It's about controlling YOU.
A free man owns a gun. A slave does not. Which are you?
2006-10-10 02:19:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by christopher s 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
We should absolutely be allowed to own guns. It is our right to own and bear arms. We have plenty of gun laws already on the books that are not enforced. Only law abiding citizens follow those rules. Can you even imagine a country where all law abiding citizens hand over their guns? Who's left with guns? Criminals !! Criminals on a free for all !! Have you seen the looting in LA and New Orleans when there was no fear consequences? That's what will happen. Criminals will be free to break in and rob any house or business anywhere with no fear ! I will always have guns, safely in my home. I pray I will never need it, but it's there if I do.
2006-10-10 02:04:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
If you read the constitutions of the original thirteen colonies, on which the national constitution was based, you will find that gun ownership is a right given to all Americans.
If you check crime statistics, you will find the least crime in those states which have the laxest gun laws, and the most crime in states which have the strictest gun laws.
An armed man is a citizen; an unarmed man is a subject.
The only government which prohibits gun ownership is a government that is afraid of its citizens.
2006-10-10 01:59:22
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
that's an effective quote yet I in no way heard of it in my final 26 years of Engineering profession. besides the undeniable fact that i've got faith this quote is written or coined by a guy or woman who became in no way an engineer. the genuine fact is - whilst absolutely everyone sees a situation - an engineer sees the reason of the subject and fixes the comparable. whilst absolutely everyone does no longer see a situation - an engineer can see what may be the envisioned situation and he's taking the precautionary degree, For this action absolutely everyone thinks that once there is not any situation and engineer creates his very own situation. In my 26 years profession the entire era i'm in shopper help (i.e. After revenues provider). In my modern-day place of work i'm seeing extensive-unfold 250 persons with a minimum of 360 issues common. The day "If there is not any situation" would in no way come to an engineer in next one thousand years.
2016-12-26 15:02:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by dustman 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Law abiding people should be able to own firearms. The root of crime does not lay at the base of gun ownership, but lays in social disorder. Drugs are the bases for most crime today, in that is greed. Look and see where most crime has its roots.
For me, I live in the country. If I call the police it can take 20 to 45 minutes for a officer to arrive. Criminals know this and are now doing rural home invasion. For me, I want that right to defend my home and family.
As a retired Police Officer (Deputy Sheriff) there were quite a few times where, I was assisted by a law abiding armed citizen and law abiding citizens used their personal arms to defend their homes and or capture a criminal.
Did you know that more children are seriously injured and killed per capita by bicycles then by firearms.
For every right and freedom, there is a risk and a responsibility.
2006-10-10 01:59:53
·
answer #8
·
answered by Eldude 6
·
4⤊
0⤋
Yes.
The Constitution protects our right to own a gun.
The Declaration of Independence states that we have the right to abolish a tyrannical government. Without guns, that is not possible.
Guns don't kill people, people kill people. As evidenced by the fact that humans killed each other for millenia before the gun was invented. Also evidenced by the fact that 46,000 died in vehicles last year, and less than 16,000 were killed by guns.
2006-10-10 02:19:36
·
answer #9
·
answered by Aegis of Freedom 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
where do you live? in america, the right to bear arms, that means own guns, is a constitutional right. it should be regulated to some extent since the technology behind guns has greatly increased since the days that the bill of rights was written but not drastically regulated. also, let me just say here, cause i know that people are gonna say this...guns do not kill people. other people kill people. i never hear people say lets outlaw axes because of the ax murders. i grew up in a house where there were guns. i had a gun cabinet in my bedroom. i never messed with them. it was made clear to me how dangerous they can be. teh problem isn't the guns. its stupidity of the people who own them. anyway, that was off track, sorry. it comes back down to where do you live?
2006-10-10 02:04:36
·
answer #10
·
answered by kajunprincezz 3
·
1⤊
0⤋