What's the philosophy or logic behind allowing public to keep handguns in the US?

Question

I think a lot of bad incidents could have been prevented if guns are made illegal to be held by public. Why don't people understand?

I've hardly heard people using guns to prevent themselves against criminals. All the time I hear criminals killing the innocents. That means the "good people" are using their weapons just for showing off (?) and to feel macho.

one answerer asked:
"And how do we get the illegal guns out of the hands of criminals? "

Go and ask your pretzel eating Pres. Once things get really out of hand, it is hard to choose a right direction even if one wants.

Answer 1

Give people the fundamentally free choice and most will choose not to have a gun. Feeling threatened by something in your life takes away that freedom to choose, so ironically most of these gun control arguments result in the same events that they cite as reason, the argument of threat just adds to the perceived threat anyway. It's a vicious self perpetuating cycle.

There is a level where this ultimately goes back to the mindset that produces guns rather than the one who chooses to own them. Once you have the weapons _peace_ is "not using them", once you have begun not using them the next logical step is not to have them at all, after all, you're not using them, so why pour energy into creating them. This is the step that the US stumbles on and frustrated goes back to the circle of self defeating controls instead.

Getting into the mindset of a culture that wills guns to be, but contradicts itself in wishing that to be the reason they are not used....... well..... how can you reason with something so irrational? If it was anything else you wouldn't even bother.

Answer 2

If it were a criminal offense to possess a gun, then only the criminals would HAVE guns. Don't you think that leaves the rest of us at their mercy? Recent example: If one of the other students at VA Tech had been carrying a gun, the killer might have been stopped before he finished his killing spree, lives might have been saved. People just have to be responsible for their actions, that's the best mankind can hope for. People aren't ALLOWED to drive while drunk, but many still do, and they kill more people every year in America than guns do...

Answer 3

In the beginning, it was the concept that the ordinary citizen was part of the defense militia of the country.

Over time, it came to mean (at least to the Michigan militia) that citizens had the right to arm themselves even against the government if desired.

Today, it's simply a money-making racket for cheap gun manufacturers and itinerant gun dealers who offer questionable firearms at gun shows and shady gunshops. These people arm the gangsters, gang bangers, and general criminals in our cities, and make a LOT of money doing so.

It's blood money, though.

Answer 4

The fallacy in the banning handguns argument is it creates a law that only persons intent on observing the law would follow. Criminals by definition don't observe the laws. Under such a scenario as you suggest, the law abiding people would turn in their guns and lawbreakers wouldn't. The net effect--the law abiding public are now defenseless against armed criminals.

Answer 5

Perhaps if 'they' (our forefathers?) came up with a test for Intelligence people could have taken to determine if they were smart enough to own a gun. But they didn't. They were in a hurry to write the constitution, so they could get back to their secret rendezvous with their black slave women. So as a determination to uphold our freedom to live without fear of European bullsh*t in the new world, they just wrote in that part about us having our rights to defend ourselves, like as in "the right to bare arms". I understand perfectly that there are a lot of dumb a** people around with guns who shouldn't even be handling a pair of scissors, and whom all those late night telemarketing ads for silly gadgets @ $19.95 a pop plus shipping and handling are geared for because they can't handle a simple piece of wire without tangling themselves to death with it. So, who should have guns then in your opinion? Just cops, law-abiding and rogue ones alike? And how do we get the illegal guns out of the hands of criminals? And when? After they brake into a home owner's home and murder the homeowners because the dearly departed 'couldn't bare arms'? Learn handgun safety and Earn a license to own one, or leave the slinkies for the smart kids and go back to China b**ch!

Answer 6

If all the people who were killed in the virginia tech tragedy had guns. Fewer people would have been lost.

Criminals will always find a way to possess guns.

Answer 7

It is Economics and Marketing fundamental s of some big Private pockets .

What kills cannot be equated with words like Philosophy or Logic.

Remove Private Controls of Manufacturing these ghastly 'utensils of devil's kitchen' and you will have some semblance

Answer 8

People don't understand that the right to have arms is one of the founding principals of this great country. If you don't understand or can't live with it I have a suggestion for you. Don't leave, join the USMC, serve your country for 4 years, then see if you still feel the same way. If you still feel the same then leave.

Answer 9

Is completely insane and legal.
Can you imagine a person killing 32 students with a knife or a baseball bat?
Is the same theory of the nuclear bombs. The bombs are completely inhuman. Why you need a nuclear bomb? Why you need a AR-15 in your house?
Is the same question. Or not?

Answer 10

I agree, hey while were at it lets make drugs illegal too! Then nobody will have them...... What? making drugs illegal did not get rid of them? And making guns illegal will mean every criminal with a gun will have the power of god!
Please, please name one thing that can be gotten rid of by making it illegal?