2007-11-03 05:23:43 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
If we as American, law abiding citizens were not allowed to own guns, how would we protect ourselves? It is our right to protect our homes and ourselves from criminals... even the Government if they so deserve. Sure, you can say, "Ban guns and let the police protect us." Well, pot is banned... when was the last time you did or you saw someone smoking pot. Yet, it is illegal. YOU WILL NEVER GET GUNS OFF THE STREET; criminals will always be able to get them and use them... therefore you should always be allowed to protect yourself.
The old saying goes, "If you want something done right, do it yourself." Some body walks into my house with a gun, knife or weapon of any kind, I'll be damned if I wait around for the police to arrive while the guy rapes and pilliages my family!
That's why.
Oh, and it constitutional! We all seem to forget that timeless document!
2007-11-03 05:31:22 · answer #1 · answered by Gengras Motorcars 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Starts with the Magna Carte, then ideas follow through in John Locke's "Two Treaties of Government" and Edmund Burke's commentary on English Law.
The Founding Document of this Great Nation recognized that there is a God-given right to life, thus self-preservation is a human right that transends all government restraints.
The Second Amendment is the recognition that the government can't subvert that right.
2007-11-06 17:36:35 · answer #2 · answered by .45 Peacemaker 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Is this a homework question? If so, quit messing around on the 'Net and get back to work...
Otherwise, all one has to do is look at why this country was founded. The right to bear arms, religious freedoms, and freedom of choice were all foundations of our government and the constitution.
Just read the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution and its Amendments, and you'll get all the answers you need.
In short, the founding fathers were tired of having someone else arbitrarily decide what they could and couldn't do.
2007-11-03 05:32:45 · answer #3 · answered by gromitsprinkles 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
sure, they could desire to be allowed to very own any style of firearm. do no longer punish the sensible, regulation abiding, mentally good human beings, for the dumb ***, immature, regulation breaking delinquent movements of a few human beings. Blame the mothers and dads who did no longer do their pastime elevating those childrens. they only drop them in front of the T.V., pc or Xbox and could't make certain what went incorrect. I used to make certain mothers and dads and their childrens spending time jointly, now they not often understand one yet another. i'm going to guess maximum mothers and dads can no longer even call their childrens 3 superb friends, or their childrens primary outfit to positioned on, or a particular musical team they like. How approximately something less difficult, what grew to become into their final homework task and what grade did they get? you will discover different those people who dedicate those shooting crimes, felt that they weren't linked to all and sundry or something. in case you haven't any connections, you truly won't be able to be predicted to care or empathise for all and sundry. Making greater regulations will do no longer something, yet being concerned and connecting jointly with your infants and kin will do a international of solid.
2016-10-03 06:15:38 · answer #4 · answered by mehan 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because it says in our constitution that a free ppl should be able to 'bear arms'.
Countries that have taken guns away from their citizens, may feel very superior when they hear about the school shootings here.
But what gun control ppl refuse to see is that gun control laws only take guns away from the ppl who follow laws.
And if law abiding ppl don't' have guns, and the criminals do, what happens?
2007-11-03 05:28:33 · answer #5 · answered by pansyblue 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
because us americans live in this world of fear and feel that owning a gun gives us the power to protect ourselves. the sad reality is that it does far more harm than good. if we tried to change this law now, it would just take the weapons away from the good citizens of this country and keep them in the hands of the criminals. something has to be done though as far as i'm concerned. there is far to much hate, violence, and racism in this country to allow us to have guns. go figure...
2007-11-03 05:31:26 · answer #6 · answered by Jesus Quintana 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
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.
2007-11-03 05:27:19 · answer #7 · answered by TheOnlyBeldin 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
1st amendment rights, baby. We have the right to bear arms. And any body who wants to take them away, can have mine with they pry it from my dead hand. They better bring more than a piece of paper if they are going to remove the guns from the hands of American Patriots.
Remember the past, the Jews in Germany did not have guns, if they had them, the Nazi would have had one hellofa fight.
Guns make the bad guys think twice before they come after you.
2007-11-03 05:27:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
"What a bright shining light we shall be to the rest of Europe! Our citizens shall be safe, on our streets and in their homes, from the terrors of the armed, marauding criminal. No longer shall we live in terror - private ownership of firearms is now banned in our country."
-Adolf Hitler, Reichschancellor, Germany, 1938
2007-11-03 05:47:24 · answer #9 · answered by Andrew S 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because we have "the right to bear arms" as stated in the constitution.
2007-11-03 05:27:07 · answer #10 · answered by Scooter_The_Squirrels_Wifey 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋