2007-02-15 02:51:38 · 21 answers · asked by J 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Because they want to control everything you do.
2007-02-15 02:54:49 · answer #1 · answered by Abu 5 · 2⤊ 4⤋
I'm sorry, I'm unaware of that fact. Gun ownership, IMHO, needs to be regulated to keep guns out of the hands who don't obey the law. It doesn't seem unreasonable to make people show ID, pass a background check, and wait a few days to get a gun.
I'm a liberal, and I've owned a lot of guns in the past, although I sold them and bought a really sweet Martin Guitar about the time of Columbine, but that was my personal choice, no one forced it on me.
I'm worried about the perception that anyone is trying to take guns away. I'm worried about people who would run into a gunshop and need to buy a Glock 10 *right now*. I'm worried about someone coming into a gunshop and wanting to buy 5 AR-15's right now.
The Supremes (the court, not the R&B group) have determined that the constitution allows private citizens to own guns, and that's fine with me.
However, all gun owners seem to leave out an important part of the second amendment. So I'll quote it right here:
Amendment II
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.
the only part of this that doesn't apply right now is the "militia" part.
As a former gun owner, I appreciate the fact that individual gun ownership (without belonging to a militia i.e. the National Guard) is a privilege. Current gun owners should be appreciative of that gift, and not fighting legitimate efforts to restrict gun ownership to those who act responsibly. It's bad PR. It gives a bad (and unearned) perception of gun owners as a whole.
2007-02-15 14:45:03 · answer #2 · answered by Charlie S 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In 1791, following a protracted war with Great Britain, the 2nd ammendment to the constitution was ratified and reads : A WELL REGULATED MALITIA, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." We have now, greater than 200 years later, a free state, and, a strong malitia. This was written at a time when our military WAS the average joe farmer who needed a weapon for his farm and hunt for food. I doubt our founding fathers could see a day when the average Joe could buy an automatic weapon whose ability to kill was beyond their comprehension, and, our nation's malitia not only kept us free, but the envy of the world. The 2nd ammendment was written in a different time. I say yes, the right to own an arm is fine, just not EVERY GUN KNOWN to kill and maim, it is, simplye unnecessary.
2007-02-15 11:03:42 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
yeah, you're kinda bringing up an issue that has all but faded away from the spotlight. the whole gun control thing has pretty much died out. i agree with the post earlier that you dont need military style weaspons, but i dont think the liberals as a whole want to take away hand guns and things like that. yes, i feel we need stricter gun control laws, but to be perfectly honest with you, the majority of people who commit crimes with guns did not legally purchase them anyway. they get them off the street where they were either bought in mexico, or stolen. so i really dont think most liberals want to take away guns anymore. as a democrat, i want to keep my guns! i own a handgun for personal protection and 2 shotguns for trap shooting. i do not see anything wrong with that.
2007-02-15 10:58:03 · answer #4 · answered by 2010 CWS Champs! 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
That's the final hurdle to a Socialist society. Disarm the citizens......
2007-02-15 11:41:47 · answer #5 · answered by aiminhigh24u2 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hey the libs did all they could, and yet somehow they couldn't get away with violating the constitution like they always are
It's mostly because they are afraid of getting shot and it is closely related to the war, so naturally libs are going to oppose it
2007-02-15 11:04:50 · answer #6 · answered by Broken Twig 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Hey Dude. I'm a Liberal and If you are a responsible gun owner you can keep your guns. I have a few guns myself. Where do you kids get these crazy ideas?
2007-02-15 11:01:09 · answer #7 · answered by bluenote2k 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Most liberals are BETA's and they want to drag the rest of us down to their wimpy level.
2007-02-15 11:16:22 · answer #8 · answered by virginity buster 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your question is based on a false generalization, so it is not worthy of any further response other than call it what it is, A LIE.
2007-02-15 11:05:28 · answer #9 · answered by Humuhumunukunukuapuaa 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because a unarmed society is easier to control.Just look how Hitler started.It's one of the liberals main objectives to disarm the public.When they do only criminals will have guns.
2007-02-15 10:58:22 · answer #10 · answered by shawnn 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Not all liberals want to do that. And some moderates want to do that as well....as in people like Rudi Giuliani.
2007-02-15 10:55:22 · answer #11 · answered by Drew P 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋