What do you think on the goverment trying to outlaw guns??

Question

What do you think about having NO GUNS?

>>>>>Take away the guns, and ONLY the CROOKS will have the guns!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Answer 1

The meaning of the Second Amendment depends upon who you talk to. The National Rifle Association, which has the Second Amendment (minus the militia clause) engraved on its headquarters building in Washington, insists that the Amendment guarantees the right of individuals to possess and carry a wide variety of firearms. Advocates of gun control contend that the Amendment was only meant to guarantee to States the right to operate militias. The Supreme Court could easily resolve this debate, but ever since the cryptic decision of U. S. vs. Miller in 1939, the Court has ducked the issue.

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.

Questions

1. Does the historical evidence support the conclusion that the Second Amendment guarantees the right of individuals to possess firearms?
2. If the Second Amendment does create an individual right, how broad is the right? Does it include the right to possess arms that would be useful to a militia today--hand grenades, rocket launchers, etc.? Or does it create only a right to possess arms that would have been used by a militia in 1791--muskets? Or is the right answer somewhere between these extremes?
3. The Second Amendment speaks of the right to bear arms. Does this suggest, for example, that there is no right to possess weapons that could not be carried, such as cannons?
4. If the underlying concern that inspired the Second Amendment--fear of an abusive federal government oppressing states and their citizens--no longer exists, should that affect how we interpret the Amendment?
5. What is the argument for choosing what provisions of the Bill of Rights we will give full effect?
6. If the test for whether a provision of the Bill of Rights is incorporated into the 14th Amendment is whether the right in question is "fundamental to the American scheme of justice" what conclusion should we come to with respect to the right to keep and bear arms?
7. Which of the following regulations of firearms is constitutional?: (1) an age restriction, (2) a four-day waiting period for purchase of a firearm, (3) a ban on the carrying of concealed weapons.

Answer 2

If you are in the U.S. and asking this question, then as a former Golden Eagle in the N.R.A. I will attempt to answer your question in a reasonable way as I know there will be those who won't like what I am writing here.

First of all....having a firearm is part of the U.S. Heritage. It was born from the settling of the " wild west " when protection of home and family was of most importance.

That right was born in the United States Constitution from the founding fathers with the Right to Bear Arms. The government has many times tried to get the guns away only to be reminded by the political right that those who want to take the arms away are going against the Constitution and to back off. The U.S. Supreme Court has backed the Constitution in all court challenges from the left and others.The founding fathers realized that if a government could take away those arms [ they in ] the government could control the people.

The U.S. will never outlaw guns entirely because it is written into Constitutional Law. Period.

If the Government tries to take away the firearms altogether, I hate to see what would ensue from that point on.

Answer 3

Well... Umm lets see crooks wouldnt have guns if they outlawed them o.0.....But my opinion about the Gov. taking away our guns is ridiculous. They took away all the guns in Australia and the crime rate went up 200% just because the bad people knew that people couldnt defend themselves that well. So I personnaly think that if they did outlaw guns (I live in Ohio by the way near Cincinnati which is the 8th highest crime city in the U.S.A) it would be chaos it would be like hell on earth.

Answer 4

I think it's a BIG BAD IDEA. Washington, D.C. is a no-gun zone and look at their crime rate, soared! The U.K. went no guns and look at their crime rate, soared! The day guns are outlawed in this country is 1) the day mine is pried from my cold dead fingers and 2) the day we becomes subjects, not citizens. There is a reason the forefathers put that protection in there, it is to protect us from our own government. They knew that future generations might get power hungry and that history might repeat itself. When I see politicians and lobbyists on t.v. touting how we shouldn't have guns, that our country is safe, I see people not living in the real world anymore. If our country were truly safe, gun sales would lower all on their own, because people would feel like they didn't need them. In states where people have right-to-carry laws, the crime rates are much lower than states that don't. Why? Because any criminal knows it is much more in their favor to attack an un-armed citizen, than to attack one that is packing heat and could possibly kill them. Criminals are going to be thinking twice, "could that person have a gun, is my life truly worth 200 dollars or a t.v.?" if they know it is legal for people to be armed. No guns=higher crime rate. Its that simple.

Answer 5

It's been done before: Nazi Germany, The Soviet Union, Romania, China, North Korea...yea, those all turned out just greeeeaaatt!

One correction, though: Only the crooks AND THE CROOKS IN GOVERNMENT will have guns.

Answer 6

Don't tell me America is finally learning that "guns kill". They should never have legalised them in the first place

Answer 7

Violates the whole right to bear arms. Which I believe is to protect ourselves.

Answer 8

I am a citizen not a subject, firearms assure that.