Do we need more gun control, less or none at all? Keep in mind that the population of the US consists of people who live in cities as well as out in the country (rabid animals and predators do still attack people, pets and livestock). Or, instead of more gun control should we punish criminals who use guns more severely as a deterrant. I'd like to hear both sides of the issue because it is such a controversial one.
2007-08-28 04:18:20 · 13 answers · asked by Susan G 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Between municipal, county, state and federal governments we have more than 22,000 gun laws on the books in this country. They were all passed in an attempt to stop criminals from having access to guns. Obviously none of them have worked. I would be in favor of repealing every one of them, allow anyone to have any weapon they want, then make it mandatory that any person using a gun in the commission of a crime receive a 50 year sentence with no chance for parole. Since laws don't keep guns out of the hands of criminals, keep the criminals out of the general population.
I bought my first gun 56 years ago at age 12, legally, through the mail from Sears Robuck. Let a 12 year old try that today and see what happens, yet most of my friends of that age at that time, all had guns. None of them committed crimes with their guns.
2007-08-28 04:51:29 · answer #1 · answered by Dick F 3 · 4⤊ 1⤋
I am from Tennessee in the USA and I think that enforcing the gun laws already on the books would be a good place to start. And stiffer penalties for felonies involving guns. I think all law abiding citizens should be encouraged to carry concealed weapons. No one can deny that places that have less gun control, have less crimes. And why would some of you want to limit me on the size, and amount of guns I have? That is like limiting the amount of Horsepower in a vehicle. My friend has a 550 Hp Mustang Cobra. Excessive to some but, So What! Mind your own business, if someone wants that and they are law abiding then by all means they should enjoy it! Same as a 50 caliber BMG sniper rifle accurate at over a mile. Some would call it excessive then again, mind your own business and if some one is willing to pay about $6000 for it what is the problem? Thugs wont have these weapons cause there money is tied up in drugs. " You can take my guns when you pry them out of my cold dead hands " Charlton Heston
2007-08-28 19:49:44 · answer #2 · answered by toolman 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Once there is complete working gun-control, it is considered that people cannot exercise any control of the government which has moved away from the people and is already out of control. Holding on to their guns is the last stronghold. Whether you believe it or whether you are a gullible pushover, the safety of all Americans rests much on your shoulders.
There probably will not be another president to vote for in USA. It is probably just as well with the majority pie-in-the-sky mentality of my fellow citizen.
Let the people have their guns to protect themselves and their families or the already established criminals will take over everything, vying with the scoundrel-government to take over against Mr.Mrs.Ms U.S. Citizen. Live while you can. The country is in terrible trouble. The answer will never come by cheating nd lying to your fellow man, but by helping him.
2007-08-28 05:38:28 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think its our right to own guns if we want. Most people use them responsibly for hunting or protection. I don't think stricter laws on who can buy guns is a solution because most criminals don't buy them. There should be more gun training for things like how to use, store, and clean your gun safey should be required.
The problem is the few people that abuse this right. We should have much stricter punishments for those who use guns to break a law. Add an automatic extra 10 years and no early release to any sentence for a crime involving a weapon. Example: if robbing a bank is 10 years and you use a gun then you get 10 more years (I made up the numbers).
2007-08-28 04:52:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Gun control is "hitting what you aim at".
Gun control doesn't work.
The regs on guns don't work now. Look at all the criminals who have guns now.
How about making law that everyone has to carry a gun? Bet some theives might think twice about mugging you.
Before you flame me...I am half way joking about that last comment....but only half way...some flame away
2007-08-28 04:26:09 · answer #5 · answered by Mark W 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I do not own a gun but one of our rights as a US citizen is the right to bear arms. Our government is slowly taking away all the great things our country was based on. Freedom of choice (abortion laws) , freedom of research (stem-cell) etc... There should be a stiffer punishment to those who abuse the rights.
2007-08-28 04:37:15 · answer #6 · answered by BlueBelle84 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Gun control is a must but it does not need to be harsh. Guns for those who qualify for them and stiffer penalties for those who use them in crimes. I hunt so I want one but I do not see a need for one that fires 200 rounds per second. I also favor limiting the amount and type of gun one can own. I have no need for a pistol so I dont own one. Why own a gun just to have it.
2007-08-28 04:26:05 · answer #7 · answered by bildymooner 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Its clean interior the form we've a acceptable to bear hands and look after ourselves. that may not a civil acceptable its a civil LIBERTY.... the government wouldn't have the skill to touch it for Christ sake. It inst the weapons that reason voters to kill human beings, its the terror mongering interior the government and media. We should not be frightened of the weapons we would desire to constantly be frightened of the equipment.
2016-10-17 05:03:38 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think Bladder Control is much more important of an issue.
2007-08-28 04:27:00 · answer #9 · answered by outcrop 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Totally ineffective!
2007-08-28 04:23:26 · answer #10 · answered by Sami V 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋