English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-04-20 02:39:10 · 34 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

This is one bill . No line item vetos!!!!! Its both or none.

2007-04-20 03:45:23 · update #1

34 answers

Short answer: NOPE.

There are enough unwanted children in the world. I am not in favor of abortion but there are times when it is needed. I feel everyone should have the right to own a handgun. I MIGHT be persuaded to remove some assault rifles from the pubic. I really do not see why a hunter would need such a weapon (I guess if he couldn't hit the side of a barn, then he might).

2007-04-20 02:46:10 · answer #1 · answered by az 4 · 1 1

I would never support that. People have a choice to make when it comes to abortion. Accidents do happen, especially with really young kids who are not well educated about sex. Some people are just not financially able, healthy enough, or mentally capable of having a child. I personally think its alot better to have an abortion before the child even begins to develop, than have the baby killed (which some people do) or left on the doorstep of a church/firehouse only to never see their real mother. I think as long as there is a "decent" cutoff point as to when you can legally get an abortion, abortion is not that bad of a thing.

As for the guns, there has to seriously be a huge discussion over what to do with guns. There are so many guns on the street, that even if a law went into effect there would still be crazy amounts of criminals on the streets armed. The best thing the government could do is to really tighten the ability to purchase a gun. There needs to be more involved background checks and a legnthy time prior to an application for purchasing a gun. This would give a good amount of time for the proper authorities to see if people are actually a good candidate to legally own a gun.

2007-04-20 02:48:12 · answer #2 · answered by jpursell84 4 · 0 1

In a heartbeat! The rights and life of the unborn to me are more important than my glock.

Some of these responses were downright ignorant. Where in the constitution does it say "handgun" or "pistol?" I also see the words WELL REGULATED. I personally feel that if we have the right to bear arms in order to support a militia, then it seems to me we primarily need assault rifles the most. If we had to rebel against the govt, or fight off an enemy invader, it would be done using assault rifles, not handguns. Handguns are fun, great to conceal, great for police, good for close quarters combat, but relatively non-essential for constitutional purposes.

So Id rather have a limited choice of weapons rather than no choice when it comes to women taking the life of their infant. A hardened criminal or a psycho teenager got to make their choices in life. The unborn have no such rights currently and it is a shame we are repeating the mistakes of slavery all over gain proclaiming that a segment of the population (slave owners/abortion mothers) have the right to their human property because of color or maturity.

2007-04-20 03:14:29 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You've gotta be on some type of "no common sense" drugs. Personally, I believe that a Woman has the right to choose what she wants to do with her body.

Next, I live in Texas and both my wife and I carry a handgun legally. If guns are outlawed, only bad guys will have them and I'm too damn old to fight anymore. If you could take all the guns away, bad guys and killers would just use ball-bats, hammers, screwdrivers, knives, vehicles, bricks, and rocks. If someone wants to kill you, they will find a way. How about a plastic bag over your head duct taped around your neck. America has enough gun laws now. If the existing laws were enforced properly, there would not be so many in the hands of criminals. An armed society is a polite society and I believe in peace through fire superiority, and I damn sure don't need anyone telling me how to live.

2007-04-20 03:04:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I see the interesting irony in the question, and speaking as a conservative, I would say no. Absolutes are almost always a bad idea. (Notice I did not say absolutes are ALWAYS a bad idea, LOL, that would be absolutist)

Handguns should be legal, because (usually) the purpose is defense. Yes, they are also used for murder. I support stricter controls on handguns, with locking laws, registration, and required classes prior to ownership. Really, would you drive a car without a lesson or a license????? That simple procedure would weed out whackos and criminals.

Abortions should mostly be illegal, because (usually) the purpose is simply to kill. Of course, exceptions ought to be made for life and health of the mother, and yes...I think for rape as well as some certain severe birth defects. Is there really a reason to kill your own child? Really, most who get pregnant are simply not using birth control (I know cuz I am a doc and have seen it over and over again)

So as you can see, everything is nuanced, rarely is anything absolute. But why can't anyone compromise, EVER????

2007-04-20 02:52:54 · answer #5 · answered by greengo 7 · 1 1

Two seperate issues. The 'abortion issue' is almost totally a 'Jesus freak' thing. Nobody with any brains would attempt to force a woman they don't know to go full term. In the case of a very young woman, a child really, you could call enforced child birth a form of child abuse. As far a handguns are concerned 43 states have a right to bear arms clause in their state constitutions...turning that around isn't going to happen. Besides, how could the state repeal the 'right of self defense'? My feeling is that both of these BS issues need to be repealed and real issues addressed. Corporate fraud! The BushWar for Oil! Universal health insurance! Climate change! The shrinking middle class! I'll bet you guys could add ten more to the list!

2007-04-20 02:56:35 · answer #6 · answered by Noah H 7 · 1 2

Hell no,both should be kept legal.I love guns and a woman's body is hers to do what she wants.Why don't we try things like crime prevention or looking at the root causes of crime instead, having more birth control options avaliable,so the need for abortions would be prevented in the first place.

2007-04-20 02:50:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Nope, I actually support abortion and the right to own a firearm... though I still think a person should have to demonstrate that he or she is capable of rational thought before buying a gun. Id like to say the same should go for having sex, but that's a bit harder to regulate.

2007-04-20 02:54:21 · answer #8 · answered by Ashley 4 · 0 2

Yes. I would, but that's just me.

Of course, the bill would have to be written to make exceptions if the mother's ACTUAL life is at risk or if the baby is extraordinarily disfigured and deformed.

And the cops would have non-lethal weapons to detain criminals...
it would be legal also for citizens to have non-lethal weapons.

2007-04-20 02:55:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

It's too bad your mom didn't have an abortion.
And I need my handgun to protect my self from people like you.

2007-04-20 02:45:00 · answer #10 · answered by Yinzer from Sixburgh 7 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers