The Second Amendment was created so that individuals had the right to defend their goods and persons from individual agressors and tyrannical governments. It seems that this has been distorted into a doctrine of militarism and legalized anarchy. Isn't it time that Americans introduced proper gun controls to stop this kind of abuse of the founding priniciples of our country?
2007-04-18 04:31:06 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
The gun legislation prohibited anyone on campus from having a gun... So those who could have were forbidden to protect themselves..Harsher gun legislation will do nothing but create more victims, only law abiding citizens will be punished, criminals will benefit.
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
--Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment (1764).
2007-04-18 05:20:17 · answer #1 · answered by bereal1 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your a man after my own heart. I disagree with almost any gun law except selling to miners and such almost everything els is unconstitutional like having to register your guns (witch is what Hitler did before he took all there country's guns away except for military of course)also one of the main reasons for the second amendment was the fact that the Revolutionary war was not just caused bye taxation without representation but the fact the most of the British solders that came over came to confiscate there guns that's one big reason why the Second Amendment was put in was so that future Americans Would be able to keep there guns if the government ever got corrupted but they never actually thought that they would actually try to change it or erase it .Help stop Constitutional Abuse.
2007-04-18 04:55:41 · answer #2 · answered by oldtomfoolwithallduerespect 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
at the same time as you reside in a u . s . of 307 million individuals and it takes the police an often happening of 15 to twenty minutes to respond to a 9-a million-a million call, you will understand. the actual incontrovertible fact that murderers have weapons is reason adequate for regulation-abiding voters to very own them. You do understand that a gun is barely one weapon very nearly constantly in a relatives? There are knives, poison, rope, thousands of formed daily gadgets that is used as a weapon. Chicago banned weapons for 7 years. The violence and homicide rates have been so undesirable they had to boost the ban. we are meant to pick that for the country? Why do diverse countries care what u . s . a . does or does not do? they could take our international help without question, then turn around and take a glance at to criticize each and every thing approximately our society. we are actually not telling diverse international places what to do, so it may well be mutual.
2016-10-22 12:34:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The legal weapons in this country are not the cause of the "militarism and legalized anarchy...it's the illegal ones. Guns have been illegal in England for some time...now they are talking about the need to make "saber" type swords illegal, because of assaults. If a person wants to maim or kill another person...getting rid of ALL weapons won't stop them. Prisoners make weapons out of anything.
2007-04-18 04:39:05 · answer #4 · answered by Mike M. 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, the Second Amendment keeps the Constitution intact.
That guy broke MANY laws, how in the world would one more make a difference?
2007-04-18 04:39:45 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
What part of "Shall Not be infringed!" is so hard to understand?
Gun control, only controls honest people.
Criminals, by definition, >DO NOT< follow laws.
The >ONLY< effect of gun control laws is an abundance of disarmed, honest, law abiding citizens.....
That and emboldened criminals, who know they will face little, or no opposition.
Control the criminal, not the inanimate object.
T.S.
2007-04-18 04:39:51 · answer #6 · answered by electronic_dad 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
how about replacing gun ownership with an increased police presence? If gun owners are really keen on protecting people, they wouldn't mind going through training, evaluations and then volunteering to serve and protect!
2007-04-21 14:38:48 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
you missed one important aspect of gun ownership, it's not only to defend from opposition outside our government but also within. yes, gun restriction laws have betrayed the constitution, the sooner we abolish these restrictive laws the sooner we can return to our founders vision.
2007-04-18 04:38:53 · answer #8 · answered by Alan S 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
We can pass as Manny laws as we want,there always going to be illegal guns around.
2007-04-18 04:37:34 · answer #9 · answered by YaDanny 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The law is fine...people arn't...We just need better background checks...
2007-04-18 04:34:58 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋