Logically speaking a criminal will find the means to carry out their acts unhindered by laws against them as their intent is to break the law.
If we banned guns tommorow then all of the good people become defenseless and utterly dependant to the cops.
Criminals will get guns either way.
2007-02-05 10:48:36 · 10 answers · asked by Socrates 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Yes some crime is sporatic.
Im not saying just anyone can carry I think
there should still be testing, and education
to make sure you understand how to operate the weapon, and morality screening with a polygraph, by no means do I want someone who is not stable owning a weapon.
As with any right it brings responsibility.
2007-02-05 11:13:41 · update #1
I think it is important that everyone be allowed to own guns/weapons. It is this reason that it is unlikely we will have a war on American soil. However, I cannot agree that the entire population be allowed to carry concealed weapons. I feel they would become a temptation to some. It is one thing to carry gun hunting or to go shooting (unconcealed) but another to carry concealed weapons. And to think we need a weapon at all times for our safety is somewhat of a sad and not yet that scenario.
2007-02-05 10:58:21 · answer #1 · answered by Jiselley 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Your argument lacks logic. If we let anybody carry guns ( & swords ? ). Then that would undermine our society as a whole and all that we have built as a civil society. From a small percentage of legalized gun owners and illegally posessed guns, we have managed to keep the criminal sector at a minimum and keep our society more safe than if we had allowed everybody to carry a weapon in which case what would happen is everyone would own a gun or some other type of weapon ( because it's legal ) it would increase the crime, murder rate about 90% and well, we may as well all be soldiers in a never ending war. Our society would collapse and their would be no order, peace, personal security, and peace of mind, Go live in Columbia for a few months. I don't mean at the Hilton. Go to the small towns like the ghettos, Suburbs. Then come back and ask that question again with all sincerety. Would you feel safe on a subway full of perfect strangers all carrying guns? Not me. Most of the crazies are on the subway and If some nut decides to open up on everyone, where you gonna go?
2007-02-05 11:20:03 · answer #2 · answered by zzap2001 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It doesn't matter what you give them....if that is what they want to play with they will just make a gun or sword out of a stick or something else (like a finger....try taking that away from them). Your neighbor kid's behavior is the result of lack of discipline, not the result of having toy guns or swords. One of the basic rules is that you do not aim at someones face with ANY toy, and the toys should have been taken away when they did that. A nerf gun is not going to hurt anyone unless they get hit in the eye. My kids had water guns, nerf guns, and my son had a BB gun when he was a teenager. They are not aggressive people, and no one ever got hurt playing with them. My son's bicycle was the greatest danger to life and limb...he loved to do stunts with it.
2016-05-24 19:43:39 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, because we all know how law abiding things were back when everyone carried a gun. That whole "Wild West" thing.
Last thing I need is some jackass thinking he's the second coming of Wyatt Earp shooting it out with a mugger outside my house. Give the guy your wallet for god's sake. He break's into your house? Fine, shoot him.
If you really believe that we have an unrestricted right to carry weapons, then there should be no limits. Do you really trust *me* to know when to use or not use the linked .50 Brownings mounted in my truck?
2007-02-05 10:58:51 · answer #4 · answered by esquirewinters 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
we should, but personally i think concealed is better. less of a chance of people getting hurt by tripping over the tip of your rapier.
if you take away a persons ability to defend themselves, you take away their RIGHT to defend themselves.
criminal with a gun vs. a person who doesn't have one ....guess who wins.
"A .44 slug in the brain stops rape in an instant. And saying 'I have a gun!' may stop it quicker than that." - Penn Gelette
2007-02-05 10:53:59 · answer #5 · answered by Dashes 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
no not really because a lot of criminals kill people with a gun without thinking of it and also most criminals don't go out and intend to break the law they just do
2007-02-05 10:52:34 · answer #6 · answered by smarterthanthevice 1 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Concealed-carry is the criminal's worst nightmare.
2007-02-05 10:50:34 · answer #7 · answered by Frank 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Yea, it's our Constitutional right to bare arms. If guns were illegal, only criminals would have them.
2007-02-05 10:51:11 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I do carry a gun. In a fight, my gun will trump the sword every time.
2007-02-05 11:01:44 · answer #9 · answered by zombiefighter1988 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
absolutely YES
2007-02-05 10:53:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋