Why does public need any kind legal guns? Isn’t it the business of government to protect people?

Question

Many countries have absolute prohibition of guns and they do not have a problem.

USA should prohibit all kinds of guns from the society. It may take two or three years to completely track and remove all legal and illegal guns. And initially there may be a situation where good people do not have guns but bad people have. But it’s worth taking that risk.

When there will be no guns in the neighborhoods, no gun shops and not gun import or smuggling then there is no reason for me to have a legal gun.

It’s the business of government and police to protect people. It’s a really a bad idea to sell legal guns to people and ask them to protect themselves. Because it’s impossible to differentiate good from bad, defense from attack, mentally stable from mentally sick.

A person may be stable and good today, he can have wrong intentions an year after.

Answer 1

Government is to govern people. Servicemen and policemen are to service and protect the public. When the latter two not doing their job fast enough, public need to get guns to protect themselves.

Answer 2

All you have to do to make that happen is to get a major change in the Constitution. You know that little clause that says we have the RIGHT to bear arms.

Now I want you to consider on thing. Liberals are not in favor of guns and generally don't own one. Conservatives on the other hand are generally in favor or owning firearms and do, some own several. So if it comes to a fight who do you think will win?

You point out that a person may be stable and good today, he can have wrong intentions an year after. That is true. However is that a problem with the guns? It's a problem with people. Why don't you ban people instead?

I've owned the same gun for forty years. It has never killed a single human being. But you want to end it's existance? If you don't want to own a gun that is YOUR choice.

Remember VT was a gun free zone. If it weren't, being Virginia I'm sure someone in the classes would have been carrying a handgun. And the death tool would have been much lower. Remember it was the people who followed the rules that died first. I'm sorry, as long as there aren't law enforcement officers in EVERY room carrying side arms things like VT are going to happen. Are you going to pay for that much additional manpower?

Answer 3

You're dead wrong when you say countries that have absolute prohibition of guns don't have a problem. Criminals in Canada and the U.K. use illegally obtained firearms to kill people, rob banks, commit acts of rape, the list goes on and on. Criminals always find ways to get guns, even if they cannot be obtained legally.

You're also dead wrong when you say it's the business of government to protect people. It's the responsibility of the individual to have respect for the law and also to have respect for the damage guns can cause. Government should only intervene in those cases where people demonstrate that they are not respectful of the law or responsible enough to possess a firearm. What you advocate is a communist state where the government has complete control and has police, military members, and government agents on patrol 24/7 watching every move we make and having the authority to invade our privacy at will without just cause (hey, that's the only way government can adequately protect the people against crime).

Finally, you are SO VERY WRONG when you say it may take two to three years to completely track and remove all legal and illegal guns. You will NEVER be able to track and remove all illegal firearms unless -- again -- we go to a communist state where the government has absolute power to go into any home or residence at any time without warning and without cause. The Canadian Crown and Scotland Yard haven't been able to track down and eradicate all illegal firearms in their respective countries and their laws banning handgun ownership go back several decades.

I have to say it: YOU'RE AN IDIOT. Blaming guns for crimes committed with guns is like blaming food for people being overweight. We have to eat in order to survive, so it's not the food's fault if someone is fat -- it's the fat person's fault for eating more than he/she needs and not getting enough exercise. In the same manner, a gun all by itself can't harm anyone. A PERSON has to pick it up, put bullets in it, point it at someone, and pull the trigger. So use your brain and find fault where it is rightfully found -- with the irresponsible people who put themselves above the law and use guns to commit crimes. Punish them, not law-abiding citizens who own guns.

Answer 4

The right to bear arms is one of the founding principles in America. The will to do wrong with this weapon is just as much as with anything they might find. A gun surely makes it easier and more deadly, but guns are not responsible for the violence. Some people would carry on just as violently with any means at their disposal, take away one weapon and it will be replaced by another.

It may be the government's job to protect us, but it is also our job to protect the government. It may, one day, be our job to protect ourselves from the government. I guarantee an invasion would never work, either, with so many people in possession of firearms.

Answer 5

Firearms do have legitimate recreational uses -witness that shooting sports have long been part of both the summer and winter Olympic Games. Also, I'm sure you're aware that many nations permit sport hunting. The problem in the United States is that people are enamored of the myth of the Wild West, in which an armed populace was much safer from crimnal activity. The exact opposite is true: witness that it was when there were virtually no regulations regarding firearms that such people as John Wesley Hardin, William (Billy the Kid) Bonney, Frank and Jesse James terrorized large areas of the country. Last year, thirty thousand citizens died or were seriously hurt through the mishandling of firearms while only about three hundred criminal acts were thwarted through the use of firearms by private citizens. I don't like those odds, and I'm a gun owner! Yes, we do need much stricter regulation of concealable firearms in the United States!

Answer 6

What planet did you come here from? I am not sure where you got your facts from but you might try staying off of left wing liberal web sites. Lets say for example that you are a criminal. Your preferred crime is home robbery. Would you rob a house that you know has followed this proposed ban on guns you call for, or a house that is known for having guns in it with people that are not scared to use them? I am sure you would go into the house with no guns? Saying lets ban guns is like saying lets ban cars, trucks, vans, and etc... Cars kill more people than guns ever thought about. Gun owners have a responsibility to act in a responsible manner with their weapons. Failure to do so results in penalties. You must remember guns don't kill people, people kill people. A gun is just a tool to kill in an efficient manner. If you can blame guns for killing people, I can blame pencils for mis-spelling words. I believe in the 2ND amendment for better or for worse. This is one of our right granted to us by our founding fathers and will not be taking away by you or no one else with out a fight. Being the anti-gun crowd don't believe in owning guns it will be a Pretty easy fight.

Answer 7

IF anythng the public needs more guns cause what we got now wont stop an abram let alone an APC. How are we supposed to over throw a forigeen or our own government with our pitfull arsenal as it is LEGALIZE ALL GUNS NO RESTRICTIONS FIGHT THE KING OF ENGLAND!!!

Answer 8

However, it would not be hard for me figure out, that if I was sitting in my home and some person decided to come in and rob me at gun point, that this person had good intentions or that he/she was going to just ask for directions..lol
And they just might get a free ticket to meet their maker..

If we all had a collective conscience to not break laws, then yes, your point would be well taken..

Answer 9

The government must limit the possession of guns in order to prevent the occurrence of irresponsible shooting just like the one in Virginia Tech. Only law enforcement personnel, security personnel and soldiers must be allowed to possess guns.

Answer 10

According to gun advocates we don't need the legal sale of guns to protect ourselves because we can just buy one on the black market if we want.