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

What's so great about a country that is so violent, so dangerous... that everyone has to be armed in order to feel safe?

2007-08-23 18:05:33 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

Frfiter, you expect me to come through your monitor? Fine... Ready?

2007-08-23 18:28:38 · update #1

20 answers

I wasn't going to respond to this but after reading some of the other answers it seemed that many just didn't get the question. I doubt that most people would argue against those living in rural settings and on farms having guns to hunt, kill predators like coyotes and put injured animals down. But why do others feel like they need handguns, semiautomatic weapons, etc. in order to defend themselves? Yes, it must be the society is the only answer that I can come up with. Canada is right next door and we don't seem to need a gun in every drawer. Amend the amendment dudes! It will likely take a hundred years to get all the guns off the streets so might as well get started. Then you can learn to settle your differences through a unique concept called discussion. It might even put a stop to all those lawsuits that you enjoy so much. So, I don't know if I would call the society backward, but certainly dysfunctional ;) It is a sad state if it takes guns to feel safe.

2007-08-24 02:41:53 · answer #1 · answered by Shine! 3 · 4 2

Hi, Lamplighter.

Yes, there are many supporters of the Second Amendment who feel they need guns for protection.

However, there are other uses for guns. Often, this is an urban/rural divide.

In the country, there are many places that are without any real police protection. The sherrif can take forty minutes to show up, if he/she ever shows up at all.

People tend to keep shotguns or handguns around just in case, and they also have large, nasty dogs.

Secondly, a gun is not just a weapon for killing other human beings, in self-defense or otherwise.

It's also a tool that must be nearby, if you own animals. Sometimes pretty terrible things happen to farm animals, and they must be dispensed with. The vet can be very far away.

There are people who hunt and they eat the animals they killl. This is no worse than eating chicken wrapped in cellophane.

Most importantly, I personally do not want to live in a country in which we alllow government officials to be armed, and we are forced to be unarmed.

The founding fathers looked ahead to a time when the people might have to take up arms again, and form a militia.

Think about it.

2007-08-24 01:03:45 · answer #2 · answered by Raven 2 · 3 0

I don't have a problem with people using guns for hunting and euthanizing injured or sick farm animals. But really, why does anyone who lives in a city need a gun? I am so sick of hearing about how owning a gun is such a sacred right and how people need them to defend themselves. Whatever happened to calling the police?
Think of this: Here in the U.S., it's perfectly legal to shoot someone who tresspasses onto your property to death, but if you have a pool and someone tresspasses onto your property to use your pool and drowns, their family can sue you for millions of dollars! And they can also sue you for millions of dollars if a tresspasser gets killed or injured on their own in some other way while they're on your property. Tell me that's not ironic.

2007-08-24 06:00:54 · answer #3 · answered by VITCH 2 · 3 0

it form of feels to me that there are comparable issues international. merely seem at Africa, the middle East, maximum of eastern Europe, China... all civilizations that are 1000's of years previous and nonetheless have not gotten their sh*t mutually. As to our issues: as long as there's a want for the loss of existence penalty, there could desire to be inner maximum gun possession. Warmongers? according to possibility, yet we confident saved some ecu *ss back in WWII. Biased media? actual, yet it fairly is an element results of freedom of the clicking. Rigged elections? No, i do no longer think of so. If it have been rigged, the canopy-up could have been so lots extra powerful. fool president- No, that could desire to bypass to the biased media. Crappy social centers? human beings could desire to get off their butts and do for themselves. smart layout? i'm uncertain what the topic is with that. Regressive taxes? a minimum of they do no longer bypass to a pair B.S. royal relatives. Fundamentalist Christians? extra powerful than the so reported as Fundamentalist Muslims. And no, i do no longer think of our clever ones trip out of the country. With the anti-American sentiment we save listening to approximately, the clever ones stay domicile.

2016-10-09 03:48:05 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Yes, they make such a fuss about 9/11 but the death toll was only a small fraction of the number of Americans murdered by their fellow citizens EVERY YEAR.
Those people who can afford it live in enclaves protected by armed guards.
And this is the sort of society they are trying to impose on other countries.

2007-08-23 18:36:59 · answer #5 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 3 3

We have the right to choose if we want to arm ourselves. No one HAS to be armed! Would you rather every innocent person be unarmed and defenseless, while the evil criminal element stalks the night armed to the teeth??? Preying upon us, and our only protection is the police that may take to long to save our lives?? Then and only then would we see a backward liberal society! Violent crime is in every nation, not just the US. Feel free to leave the US anytime if you think it's so lousy! Seriously, we won't miss you at all. One less liberal whine *** to deal with!

Maybe if we got rid of all the pathetic lawyers and liberal judges that defend these criminal low lives over the victims, and that cut all these predators that commit heinous crimes slack, allowing them back on the streets to violate and disrupt more peoples lives. Maybe then, the US wouldn't be so full of crime and violence.

2007-08-23 18:30:20 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 4

I don't own a gun. Out of my price range at the moment. But I do have a rather nice collection of swords. They're cool to have, and look at, and if someone ever tried to ransack my house I'd be chasing after them and resemble a samurai with the complexion of Casper the friendly ghost, while wearing boxers. But that doesn't mean I think the USA is a horrid place, or that I'm going to attack people on the street. But, it's nice to know I have something in my house to defend myself, should it get broken into.

2007-08-23 18:17:01 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4 3

Some say they have a gun for protection, others claim that its their right as an American citizen, but really I'll shoot to say that most people who have guns, have them cus they are just plain fun to shoot (given that safety precautions are followed).

If holding and shooting a gun scares you, then stay clear from the shooting range.

2007-08-23 18:34:11 · answer #8 · answered by jerome2all 6 · 3 1

So backward that you might get shot for asking such questions.

2007-08-24 02:32:55 · answer #9 · answered by Incognito 5 · 3 1

"Everyone needs guns..."???

I don' t need a gun for protection. Out of all the people I know, nobody carries a gun for protection.

2007-08-24 00:49:53 · answer #10 · answered by Thundercat 7 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers