Dick Cheney hunts with semi-automatic weapons. So as I Christian I must support the ease of their availability.
2007-04-16 10:21:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Actually, the key is to enforce the laws we already have, not make new ones. Do you think the criminals are going to follow the new laws if they don't follow the old ones???
The definition of a semi-automatic weapon is extremely vague. ANY rifle or pistol where you have to pull the trigger each time you fire a shell is a semi-automatic weapon. This covers alot of ground. A pump shotgun would be a semi-automatic. A revolver pistol would be a semi-automatic weapon. All firearms would have to be single shot, single load to not be classified as a semi-automatic weapon. The common misconception is that semi-automatic refers to assult style firearms, but that brings up another topic altogether.
More, tougher laws are not the answer. Statistics have shown that, in states where the "right to carry" laws have passed and the qualified citizen is allowed to arm himself, crime rates with firearms have gone down NOT up.
In my opinion, if one of the students had been armed, the death toll might have been lower. This person walked around campus armed for over 2 hours. Someone armed could have had a good chance of stopping him after the first shooting.
"If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."
It is a common saying and unfortunately, it is very true.
2007-04-16 10:27:46
·
answer #2
·
answered by TG 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yea! lets outlaw guns, because they hurt people and while your at it why not outlaw cars, they hurt people too, and anything else that can hurts someone.......well there goes the pencils, do you know how bad it hurts when you hit yourself in the leg with a sharp pencil ...dang......there goes the neighborhood-----Get a life!
Sure make the punishment fit the crime----I think we should start on death row----get a tall tree and short rope....if you are death row then make it quick.....you are wasting my tax dollars and the other sevral million people in prison, lets take them out of the regular walls of a prison, where we feed them 3 squares a day and make them sleep in tents like our military and work on farms for there food and sheltor and cloths....
Then for anyone that is found guilty of something, judge them and then hang em!
I think if you take this approach to capital punishment them I think you would see less crime here in the USA as well...If this happend we would not have to worry who has a gun or not because most law abiding citizens know how to use them.....
2007-04-16 10:38:46
·
answer #3
·
answered by 2muchcoffee 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
You sicken me when you use the word "sporting" in the context of your attempt to capitalize on a tragedy that would have been minimized had decent people been allowed to have their own guns to protect themselves and others from the evil man who murdered those people 30 miles from my home. You are either dishonest or ignorant when you say taking away the right of the people to have guns deters crime. Every time guns are banned crime goes up. Every time laws are passed allowing people to carry concealed weapons, crime goes down.
I wonder why you ask if we are Christians. What about muslims?
Jesus said in Luke 22:36, 'He that has no sword and has a garment should sell his garment to buy a sword."
At the time, swords were state of the art weapons for self defense. Now we have Glocks, and every rational honest person knows that since Jesus said Christians should have state of the art weapons for defending themselves when attacked, Jesus would want us to have a Glock now, and this Christian has 3 of them.
If someone steals your car that you properly parked and kills someone with it, would you want that person tried for murder as you suggest gun owners should be?
Have you signed up to campaign for Hillary yet?
2007-04-16 10:52:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Outlawing semi autos is ridiculous. we have a constitutional right under the 2nd amendment to bear arms. Outlawing firearms would only take them away from law abiding citizens. A criminal doesnt care anyway. do you think a criminal who wants to harm you, rob you, or kill you is going to say, "Gosh I wish guns were legal so I could use it!" No, He'll use it and the law abiding citizen will be the victim.
other countries also have a stricter judicial system that severely punishes criminals - unlike ours.
Come into my house uninvited, and I'll be your judge, jury, and executioner.
Christian - Active NRA member
2007-04-16 10:24:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by Dr. Linder 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
I do not own a gun. I will never own a gun, I do not wish to have them in the place I live.
However -- I fully support the 2nd amendment and will do nothing to stop another from exercising their right to possess, just as I do by the choice to not possess.
"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."
As I sit here and watch the Tree of Liberty wilting and crying out for nurishment after decades of being strangled by Republicans and Democrats alike who seek only their own power to force their agendas down everyone's throat... let there be the right to defend against an oppressive government.
A militia of one is a militia all the same.
Atheist, by the way.
2007-04-16 10:27:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Spoken just like Adolf Hitler.
No, guns don't kill, people kill.
The first thing Hitler did when he got into power was to tell everyone they had to register their guns then he systematically went and took them all away then he began with his Holocaust.
If you outlaw guns then only the criminals will have guns, scary thought.
I live in America where we have a Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Any gun laws only violate this Constitutional right and are illegal.
2007-04-16 10:24:40
·
answer #7
·
answered by Mariah 5
·
3⤊
1⤋
jointly as a lot of your arguments make some experience, i've got confidence i'd desire to grant somewhat guidance, of which you will no longer be conscious. shifting removed from the semi and automatics for a 2nd, As an previous protection stress guy and a scholar of historic previous, i understand many weapons have been invented to be utilized in conflict or against guy. the top distinction in using a weapon is in the around getting used. while a lot of human beings go attempting to discover deer, they carry a 30/30 lever action, made via any of countless manufacturers. the 1st lever movements have been created for the protection stress via Henry hands. Winchester observed of project to get into the hands race via making it in a lighter version and his gun became the rifle that gained the west. The Colt handgun became into initially geared up to grant the protection stress a miles better firepower than the civilian. if actuality be told rather much all weapons have been geared up for conflict and have been in ordinary terms borrowed for interest searching. Our forefathers did no longer ignore to place regulations on inner maximum possession, they did it as to arm the folk as a protection stress in case of the want for protection of domicile and united states against all invaders, distant places or kinfolk, and in case of the want of overthrowing a corrupt government. is this in all danger why the government desires to disarm us, because of the fact they are corrupt and worry the rag tag protection stress?
2016-10-22 08:25:11
·
answer #8
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Atheist- I beleive they should ban all assault weapons, In todays society we do not need guns, and if you take them out of the hands of the good people, you will also take them out of the hands of the bad people. There's just really no need, I doubt were gonna be taken over my Mexico or Canada. I think it is ridiculous for people to go hunting with guns. Shooting a defenseless animal with a gun from 50 yard away,, that takes some balls.
2007-04-16 10:28:37
·
answer #9
·
answered by JUDAS RAGE 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
I think if we outlaw anything..we will see a serge in it suddenly being very popular to have it illegally. I think higher resrictions need to brought on..leading to the inevitable outlaw of it. I am a Christian by blood..but not by choice. I don't think it has anything to do with my views. I was raised in L.A. I've seen shootings happen almost daily...however..if people aren't allowed to have them..then they want it more than anything. So to slowly resrict it..then take it away..is smart that just taking it away instantly. But I do think that eventually they need to be taken away.
2007-04-16 10:23:18
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 2
·
0⤊
1⤋