2007-04-25 11:57:33 · 20 answers · asked by pirateron 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
No......For any law abiding citizen that wants to legally obtain one. Otherwise only criminals would have guns.
2007-04-25 12:01:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
In Rawanda the peacekeepers had a problem. You see they decided that anyone who had a gun was part of a warring faction and could therfore be treated as a hostile. So what did the people who murdered those thousands of unarmed people do? They put away the few guns they had and picked up machetes, scyths, and axes. The vast majority of those killed in Rawanda were killed with edged weapons NOT GUNS!!
If you really want to reduce gun crime then implement a process of deputising law abiding adult citizens to carry guns. Each adult would have to prove that they have no criminal background and undergo a phsychological evaluation and history check. They would have to pass an intensive training course with their firearm inclucding the same basic target qualifications that police cadets must pass. If they passed all this they wqould then be allowed to carry a fire arm concealed in public.
This isn't a crazy idea. and it's not mine. look up a economist by the name of Dr John Lott.
2007-04-25 12:40:27 · answer #2 · answered by Grant E 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would like to see how you feel after your family is raped and killed and you, Mr. smarty pants, could have protected them, only if!!! Way to think things out!!! My neighbors had the front door kicked in, two days ago(Memphis, Tn, look it up). 2 guys came in and stabbed and shot 1 person but the other was able to get to his gun and he shot and killed 1 of the intruders, the other was arrested at an area hospital with a gunshot wound. Both homeowners survived thanks to having a legally owned and registered gun in the house. What say you?
2007-04-25 12:30:27 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Try selling that idea to the millions of gun owners in this country! I will agree that guns that are for military use should not be allowed to be in a civilians hands. They don't need them & by possession of them are a potential danger to those around them. There should also be extensive background checks before a person is allowed to purchase a gun. Hunting guns kill others also.
2007-04-25 12:07:42 · answer #4 · answered by geegee 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Policing only. Wars should not be allowed.
2007-04-27 05:28:18 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Stop guns being sold over internet. would help and sold in magazines .Local gun shops holds that gun a week till you are cheak out and found no wecker on you than you can pick your gun up.
2007-04-25 12:16:01 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You betcha! We are in a war now. Guns for all!
2007-04-25 12:02:30 · answer #7 · answered by bopoppa 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
OK, ther's a war on terror, a war on drugs, a war on crime,....So I guess nothing would change.
2007-04-25 12:18:56 · answer #8 · answered by Scotty 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"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."
-US Constitution 2nd Amendment
The 2nd amendment is not broke, so don't try and fix it.
2007-04-25 12:05:05 · answer #9 · answered by Mark M 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Well, with the way the lieberals push their BS these days, it's war all the time.
2007-04-25 13:55:38 · answer #10 · answered by Kevin A 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋