Would you be willing to give up you're guns if....?

Question

Nobody had guns? I know this isn't realistic but this is a what if question, what if there was some new technology that prevented firearms from working, or something to that affect so that we could say for sure, 100% no one would have a gun, would you be willing to give up you're gun? If you wouldn't, why not?

as I said this is a WHAT IF question, not an idea, and in my WHAT IF question I said NOBODY had guns, that means NOBODY not police or army.

Answer 1

Unlike most other countries ,the US has what is called a "gun culture".

It is a culture in which the gun is celebrated ,honoured and given special status.

Tied to it's early "wild west frontier" ethos,this gun culture is a manifestation (or some say cause),of the long history of American violence both internally as attested to by it's Revolution and Civil War to it's long external history of violence in pursuit of it's NATIONAL INTERESTS (read Profits)

Of the 36 wealthiest countries in the world,at 14,2 deaths per 100,000 ,the US of course has the highest rate of gun related deaths while Japan has only 0.05 and England 0.41.

As is evident by the replies on this board,gun advocates do not really give a damn about others and the overall destruction wrecked by the gun culture.

The first yahoo screams are IT IS MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. Yes,this is perhaps true but so what??

The Constitution was written over 200 years ago and since then many AMENDMENTS have had to be made to the Constitution as a result of changed times and needs .

The next arguement used by these yahoos are that we need guns to protect us from TYRANNY .

This is pure illusionary garbage.If any American or group of Americans even tried to overthrow the US government for whatever reasons,the government has all the means to destroy said people in a heart beat.

http://www.guncite.com/cnngunde.html


The US has a long history of "reaching for a gun" to resolve situations instead of other avenues.While most countries attained their freedom from colonializationNOT by revoltulution and mass slaughter,the US opted for the gun.

The Civil War is another obscenity in which hundreds of thousands were slaughtered when the gun was the means of problem resolution.

In the modern era ,the US has and continues to grap it's guns to resolve situations .

Vietnam and Iraq are perfect examples of this which has led to the slaughter of literally millions of Vietnamese and Iraqis.

Some yahoos use Switzerland as an example of a country where guns are everywhere but the gun related deaths are low.

This is true BUT un-like Americans who have a long,long manifested history of VIOLENCE ,the Swiss people ,as the internationally known NEUTRAL country, has NO HISTORY OF VIOLENCE .

In other words YOU CAN TRUST A SWISS PERSON to not abuse his/her gun because they have no ethos of violence as do Americans.

Putting a gun in the hands of an American is EVIDENCED to be an insane act that knowingly will lead to violence .

Over 30,000 Americans slaughter each other and themselves every year.

Most dispicable is the number of children slaughter in the US by guns .You gun nuts really have something to be proud of !!!!

http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/issues/?page=kids

While NO children were killed by guns in Japan and only 19 in the UK ,an morally obscene 5,285 American children were slaughtered by guns .


You monumentally hypocritical Americans wear your CHRISTIANITY on your sleeves and sanctimoniously strut around while screaming IT IS MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT while over 5,000 kids are slaughtered because of your gun culture.

Now lets hear all your lame obfuscating,rationalizations excuses.

Answer 2

You tried to envision utopia with the question but created a paradox instead...

If nobody had guns, there would be no guns to give up...and if there were such a technology, why would you care who had them?

When our 'Founding Fathers' put the right to bear arms into the Constitution, they had many things in mind, all of which apply today but not in the same context.

You should have the ability to defend yourself because the government cannot be everywhere at once. Where that may have applied to wild animals, Native Americans, or any foreign government soldiers way back then, we still have wild animals, drug addicts, terrorists (foreign and domestic), and other Americans (thieves, prison escapee, someone holding a grudge, pick one).

From another point of view, should this country ever become under siege by a foreign body, there is no way for our local, state, or federal government can arm, train, and dispense people quick enough to ward off attacks should the danger be unforeseen (it would be arrogant to believe you will always see the danger). Were the people already armed and capable of using the arms they possessed, it would shorten the amount of time the local, state, or federal government could organize and respond to a threat. All that would be necessary is to mobilize...and that still applies today.

What if our enemies did not belong to a single sovereign nation but were instead a collection of militia, would you still disarm?

I understand there are people who do not like guns, missiles, bombs, etc but that does not eliminate the need for them.

Answer 3

Ummm...if this technology guarantees that no guns work or nobody has a gun, why is my compliance required? The whole premise of the question is that you can guarantee that nobody has a working firearm, so whether or not I would be willing is irrelevant, unless your technology doesn't work...in any case, NO...I believe gun ownership and responsible training should be mandatory...

"An armed society is a polite society." If thugs knew everybody was armed they would think twice before menacing the average neighborhood...but the government's interference with gun ownership results in a situation where the criminals can be increasingly sure that they are the only ones with guns...nice job, Mr. Politician.

Answer 4

If it were possible to have a device that made all firearms unable to work .. there would be no need to give up any guns as they would be useless bits of metal ...

BUT that aside... I am an Aussie.. I can own a gun if I really want to .. BUT I DON'T. I don't feel the need to own a gun as I am safe in the knowledge that MOST other aussies are also NOT armed....
I get a little pis$ed off when some americans come on here and write things like " WHEN AUSTRALIANS HAD THEIR GUNS TAKEN AWAY" because all it shows is their own ignorrance re the situation ...

BUT THAT HAVING BEEN SAID .. If i were suddenly to find myself living in the USA ..I WOULD be inclined to own a gun .. as I would NOT be as certain that the NEXT person isn't carrying a gun and that they wouldn't use it on me....

(kind of answering your question in reverse.)

Answer 5

No.

If you think about it, that would mean that someone who was bigger than you would have an advantage over your. Or what about 6 people?

A firearm is primarily a defensive weapon. It prevents crime many more times than it is used in a crime (according to FBI statistics).

in reality, firearms will never be eliminated. You can manufacture one yourself. All civilian disarmament (gun control) does is remove firearms for law abiding citizens. This leaves firearms in the hands of criminals and politicians, but then, they are really the same thing.

Answer 6

if there were no guns people would find othe ways to kill each other. They had done it very effectivley before the invention of guns so i dont think it would make a diffrence.

But to humor your question. I would say yes except I love to hunt and I know I could go to a bow but I love bird hunting too. so i would be torn.

If they could invent something like that I would rather it be bullets that can determine if it is a human they are impacting and stop before hitting.

Answer 7

No, I would not give up my right to own guns. It is in the Constitution. There can never be certainty. What if a home intruder came after you with a harpoon? Guns are for protection.

Answer 8

I think a more important point is, why does the average citizen anticipate the possibility of needing to kill another human being? Are we THAT afraid that if we don't arm ourselves, we're going to be the victim of crime?

Check some statistics....The vast majority of shootings done by the average citizen "exercising their right to bear arms" are done to family members, either accidentally or because the person wants them dead.

Giving up our guns would be the first step toward creating a society where KILLING EACH OTHER isn't our first thought when trying to figure out how to solve a problem.

Answer 9

I would never give up my guns, if I did I would have to turn in my republican decoder ring, I need fully automatic machine guns to protect my house from the armys that are invading us, just because it hasn't happened for over a century doesn't mean it won't.

Answer 10

No, because if some big beefy guy breaks into my house all hopped up on PCP, I want to defend my family with something more effective than a baseball bat.