2007-04-12 08:00:37 · 37 answers · asked by clwkcmo 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Stay Fan 1: you may be correct in saying my question is asked incorrectly, will have to give some thought to your statement. I can assure you I am not a liberal. I will say I agree with what you are saying.
2007-04-12 08:16:08 · update #1
For all of you who state we are already given the right, I do not disagree and completely agree with you, yet, there are many cities in our nation who do not allow our constitutional right to bear arms.
2007-04-12 08:18:49 · update #2
We should absolutely be allowed to bear arms. It is the Second Amendment for a reason afterall.
It is the best way for honest, law-abiding Americans to defend themselves against criminals. Gun laws only hurt HONEST PEOPLE and leave them unprotected.
"If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."
This is a good article to read if you want to know the truth about gun laws and anti-firearm lobbyists:
http://www.davekopel.com/2A/OthWr/principal&gun.htm
2007-04-12 08:06:24 · answer #1 · answered by Kugashira 1 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Me ...... and a few others..
The Second Amendment
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.
No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms.- Thomas Jefferson, proposal for Virginia's constitution of 1776
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined or determined to commit crimes.
Such laws only make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assassins;they serve to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."- Thomas Jefferson
2007-04-12 08:13:44 · answer #2 · answered by bereal1 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I do. It says so in the Constitution. Also when Constitution was adopted 12 of the 13 states had a list if immediate amendments. Read instructions they gave delegations about them and the reasons for each amendment.
Mass. delegates were told to get the amendments passed by any legal means up to and including dueling if necessary. The first one on their agenda was the right of the individual citizen to own any firearm that is legal for the US government to own.
2007-04-12 08:12:13 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Second Amendment to the United States Constitution Protects the pre-existing right to keep and bear arms.
“ 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. ”
Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution Provides for unenumerated rights, including implicitly a right to keep and bear arms and a right to have arms for defense.
2007-04-12 08:06:44 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I think that we should stick to the constitution however there are already limitations to this We can't own nuclear weapons thats armormeant and the point of the right to bear arms is for the purposes of a militia in case of problems with the government so the example even though extreme it still works
2007-04-12 08:06:04 · answer #5 · answered by ? 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Not only do I believe we should be, I believe we are guaranteed the right to bear arms by the second amendment of the United States Constitution.
2007-04-12 08:09:36 · answer #6 · answered by Keith 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Don't make ALL arms-bearers criminals. Just punish the jerks who misuse the weapons.
Here's something to chew on: When the Constitution addresses "the right to keep and bear arms", it does not limit the arms in question to firearms.
2007-04-12 08:10:29 · answer #7 · answered by allenbmeangene 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
US citrizens HAVE the right to bear arms.
Your question is incorrect. US citizens are NEVER "afforded rights" - the US citizens permit the government to exercise certain powers.
Read the Constitution. Read the Federalist Papers.
Power lies in the US citizens. The government is a management mechanism.
Only LIBS think that the government handws out or affords rights to the citizens.
THIS is why everyone hates LIBS. Because they are fundamentally incorrect in their view of political power in the US.
2007-04-12 08:05:00 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 3⤋
I do.
Freedom is being able to say "NO" to those who would harm you or your family,deny you your rights,steal your possessions, or terrorize you.
The right to be armed safeguards all your other rights.
Government can only give a false sense of security and clean up the mess afterwards.
Where's a COP when you need one?
2007-04-12 08:12:31 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
We do have a "right to bear arms"; however, Federal and State governments have implemented many laws over the years to monitor this right for the alleged safety of the public welfare by licensing and limiting this "right".
2007-04-12 08:04:44 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋