In whose hands do you think the control of guns should lie?
2007-01-06 05:25:20 · 18 answers · asked by Bud's Girl 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
everyone that wants them and has all their mental faculties..
If felons are so bad that they can't own a gun to hunt, then they should not be out of prison.
anyone that thinks just cops should have guns should have their head checked, after the guns, what next, kitchen knives, our homes and autos? It sure as hell wasn't cops that fought at Valley forge, it was joe from the street.
who do you think is going to do the fighting when all our troops are in the gulf and these sleeper cells that we always hear about start killing people with suiside bombs right here, it's time for Americans to wake up.
2007-01-06 06:48:50 · answer #1 · answered by Dave 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Many answers appear to say who should be able to have a gun rather than who controls them. As I see it no individual authority controls guns in this country. The AFT is the entity that is supposed to enforce laws pertaining to firearms, not make policy on them.
In truth I believe that "we the people" are still have the control. When the Dems got carried away and passed the assault weapon ban and magazine capacity limits they paid for it. By the way, the ban has sunsetted for almost two years now and there has hardly been a hiccup in crime. That's because semi automatic rifles are used in crimes so seldom that they are statistically irrelevant.
If you follow this sort of thing, take note that 40 states now have "shall issue" laws. This means that in 40 states if you apply for a concealed weapons permit and you pass the states training requirements and background check the state MUST issue you a permit. These states typically have a 22% to 24% lower crime rate than non shall issues states according to the FBI's Uniformed Crime Report.
For ten years violent crime has been declining but we experienced a slight spike in violent crime in 2005. Most of the crimes that caused the spike occurred in states that do not have shall issue laws such as CA NY and IL along with Washington DC.
2007-01-07 14:04:10 · answer #2 · answered by Christopher H 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Look at Australia and Britain when guns were forbidden in private hands period. The guns were then confiscated and destroyed including some very expensive collector firearms. The down side is that crime is now through the roof because the bad guys now have nothing to fear. The bad guys also have guns. Now the pointy headed politicians that passed these loony laws are left scratching their pointy heads wondering why crime is sky high. Compare U.S cities with strict gun laws to ones with lax gun laws then compare their respective crime rates. You might find some increased homicide rates. But it's the good guy killing the bad guy. The way it should be.
2007-01-06 06:20:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I agree with btownboi who said that the citizens are more trustworthy than some of the cops.. Here in my city we have about 1 cop to every 10000 residents or more...they can't be everywhere (and trust me when I say they already spend more time in my complex than at the station).. We have had to have security guards move in EVERY complex to try to deter crime..Criminals can get guns, illegals can get guns (and not even have to license them) ..it's more true today than ever that everyone SHOULD own a gun for their protection.. My stays fully loaded. Our kids are being killed just playing in the yard and at school.. Are they not important enough to protect.. I will carry a fully loaded gun even if the govt tells me I can't..
2007-01-06 15:56:15 · answer #4 · answered by chilover 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
every citizen not only has the right to own a gun, but should be heavily armed for the reason it was put into the bill of rights, to defend ones self from a tyrannical government.
btw: if ya think gun ownership causes crime, just take a look at Kennesaw, GA
2007-01-06 08:57:44 · answer #5 · answered by Binder Dundat 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I grew up with firearms and feel perfectly comfortable with them. I'd have no problems with fewer restrictions than we have now, especially since bad guys seem to have no problem arming themselves no matter how many restrictions we place on them. Heck, I even made simple guns, bullets, and powder from simple basics around the house when I was a kid. Since it's impossible to make them go away completely, it only makes sense to trust the average citizen to do the right thing. If we don't trust the average guy, then we repudiate the whole concept of democracy.
2007-01-06 05:33:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's too late to do anything about it now. We're infested with them... 200 million privately-owned guns in a country with a TOTAL population of 300 million human beings. May as well let everybody have one at this point, and let the chips fall where they may. Anyone that wants one can get one anyway.
2007-01-06 06:48:08 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The ones that get certified to use them properly. I am all for possessing a handgun if you know how to properly use them. There is absolutely no reason a citizen should be carrying anything more than he/she can properly know how to fire and control and learn about the safety of them.
I believe it is our right to bear arms, but I also believe that anyone who has the need to own one should go through the proper training.
2007-01-06 09:40:38 · answer #8 · answered by Trese 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
America crime rate speaks for itself as for the moron who says UK and AUS crime has gone through the roof since guns abolished. Check your stats New Orleans 14 murders in one day idiots going into schools with guns if an IQ test was given as part of condition of having guns not many of you lot would have one.
2007-01-06 06:39:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
My opinion to your question is this.....
I think that the control of guns should stay where it is with the Bureau Of Alcohol Tobacco & Firearms.
2007-01-06 12:30:50 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋