Are You Pro Gun Control or Con Gontrol?

Question

How do you feel about this issue and why?

Answer 1

I'm for background checks, waiting periods, and against certain types of guns (ie assault rifles), but as long as you're not a criminal or insane, I've got no problems with people owning guns.

Answer 2

I'm pro Gun. were you doing a play on words?

I definitely think there needs to be rules for them, but no new laws are going to make a difference if the laws in place aren't already followed.

However, i should never have the right that I own a gun to protect myself taken away

Answer 3

If you are 21 years of age with no criminal history. By all means, you have the right to own a gun in case some body breaks into your house and tries to harm your family. In that split second, its life or death. Police wont arrive until 20 minutes later.

Answer 4

the original idea of giving citizens the right to keep and bear arms was to prevent an out-of-control powerful govt from ever gaining the power to opress them ... the govt should never be powerful enough that it could use the military or a police-state system to put down the people ... the people should have the power to put down the govt, well, because america is supposed to be a govt by the people and for the people ... so by this definition citizens should be able to have access to and own state of the art weaponry ... not just hunting rifles .. that was NEVER the idea ...

Answer 5

Guns for everyone! Children, Adults, Old Folks!

Answer 6

I think we should let the two sides shoot it out! I know which guns I'll bring.

Answer 7

I believe we should enforce the existing laws rather than just add new ones.

Answer 8

It is telling that among serious researchers, almost all changes in position have been from high-control to low-control positions. Here are statements by individuals who have supported the high-control position at one time or another:

"It is the contention of this observer that few homicides due to shooting could be avoided merely if a firearm were not immediately present, and that the offender would select some other weapon to achieve the same destructive goal." - Marvin E. Wolfgang, Patterns in Criminal Homicide, (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1958) p. 82 - Dr. Wolfgang is one of the founders of modern criminology. He personally opposed private ownership of firearms almost all his life.

"I am as strong a gun-control advocate as can be found among the criminologists in this country. What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Mark Gertz. The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clear-cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun against a criminal perpetrator." - Marvin E. Wolfgang, The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall 1995

"No matter how one approaches the figures, one is forced to the rather startling conclusion that the use of firearms in crime was very much less when there were no controls of any sort and when anyone, convicted criminal or lunatic, could buy any type of firearm without restriction. Half a century of strict controls on pistols has ended, perversely, with a far greater use of this weapon in crime than ever before." - Inspector Colin Greenwood, Firearms Control, (Routledge and Keegan, London, 1972) p. 243

"At first glance it may seem odd or even perverse to suggest that statutory controls on the private ownership of firearms are irrelevant to the problem of armed crime, yet that is precisely what the evidence shows. Armed crime and violent crime are products of ethnic and social factors unrelated to the availability of a particular type of weapon. The numbers of firearms required to satisfy the 'crime' market is minute, and these are supplied no matter what controls are instituted. Controls have had serious effects on legitimate users of firearms, but there is no case, either in the history of this country or in the experience of other countries in which controls can be shown to have restricted the flow of weapons to criminals or in any way reduced armed crime." - Inspector Colin Greenwood, "Shooting Back," Police Review, 10 November 1978 page 1668

"You can't get around the image of people shooting at people to protect their stores and it working. This is damaging to the [gun control] movement." - Josh Sugarmann, executive director of the Violence Policy Center, a "gun control" lobbying group in Washington, D.C., in The Washington Post, May 18, 1993 [Sugarmann is referring to the Korean shopkeepers who guarded their property with "assault weapons" during the L.A. riots.]

"One tenet of the National Rifle Association's faith has always been that handgun controls do little to stop criminals from obtaining handguns. For once, the NRA is right and America's leading handgun control organization [Sarah Brady's Handgun Control, Inc.] is wrong. Criminals don't buy handguns in gun stores. That's why they are criminals." - Josh Sugarmann, then the communications director for the National Coalition to Ban Handguns ("The NRA Is Right," The Washington Monthly, June 1987)

"After the horror of Columbine, for gun-control advocates from the White House on down to say [safety reforms such as trigger locks and smart guns] would have any real effect is laughable. Not only will smart guns have little effect on decreasing gun deaths and injury, we think it will actually increase gun deaths. It will put more guns on the street." - Josh Sugarmann, head of the Violence Policy Center, LA Times 4/18/2000

"If you've got to resist, you're chances of being hurt are less the more lethal your weapon. If that were my wife, would I want her to have a .38 Special in her hand? Yeah." - Dr. Arthur Kellerman, Health Magazine (March/April 1994) p 61

"... gun control measures that attempted to interdict the retail sale of weapons to criminals through legitimate channels miss perhaps as many as five-sixths of the criminal firearms transactions." - James Wright and Peter Rossi, Armed and Considered Dangerous, (Aldine de Gruyter, NY, 1986), p19

"It is commonly hypothesized that much criminal violence, especially homicide, occurs simply because the means of lethal violence (firearms) are readily at hand, and thus that much homicide would not occur were firearms generally less available. There is no persuasive evidence that supports this view." - James Wright and Peter Rossi, Armed and Considered Dangerous, (Aldine de Gruyter, NY, 1986)

"[W]hen used for protection, firearms can seriously inhibit aggression and can provide a psychological buffer against the fear of crime. Furthermore, the fact that national patterns show little violent crime where guns are most dense implies that guns do not elicit aggression in any meaningful way. Quite the contrary, these findings suggest that high saturations of guns in places, or something correlated with that condition, inhibit illegal aggression." - Toch, H. and Lizotte, A., "Research and policy: The case of gun control." In Suedfeld, P. and Tetlock, P. (eds.) Psychology and Social Policy. Washington, D.C.: Hemisphere, 1991

"I lobbied against the [Texas CHL] law in 1993 and 1995 because I thought it would lead to wholesale armed conflict. That hasn't happened. All the horror stories I thought would come to pass didn't happen. No bogeyman. I think it's worked out well, and that says good things about the citizens who have permits. I'm a convert." - Glenn White, President of the Dallas Police Association, Dallas Morning News, December 23, 1997

"I was wrong. But I'm glad to say I was wrong." -- Arlington County VA Police Detective Paul Larson, previously an opponent of Right to Carry, The Alexandria Journal, 7/9/97

"The concerns I had - with more guns on the street, folks may be more apt to square off against one another with weapons - we haven't experienced that." - Charlotte-Mecklenburg NC Police Chief Dennis Nowicki, The News and Observer, 11/24/97

"[Gun buybacks are] a feel-good situation - it brings together people trying to stop violence and the community," William Bratton, former police commissioner of New York City, in The Christian Science Monitor, May 4, 2000

"The continuation of buyback programs is a triumph of wishful thinking over all the available evidence....At most, they take 1 [percent] to 2 percent of guns out of a [local] community, and the guns collected are among the least likely to be used for violence" Garen Wintemute, director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California at Davis, quoted in "Gun Buybacks Fail to Cut Crime, Killings" by Mike Dorning, in the Chicago Tribune, June 9, 2000

Answer 9

Pro Gun !!!!
Ain't no one comin in my house shootin up my family !!!!!!!!
Thanks Ted Nuggent !!!!!