Do You Think Amendement Two (Right To Bare Arms) Is Necessary In Contemporary US Society?

Question

I understand it is a basic American right. I'm interested to know your opinion on if it is still necessary? I can see how that would be necessary in colonial times when the British were invading homes and such. But I just don't see why we need it in contemporary society?

Statistics point to US as extremely violent in comparison with other nations. Nations with lower homicide/suicide statistics showed greated "Gun Control" laws. Do you think greater Gun Control would lead to less violence?

I apologize if my date is inaccurate. I just recall that from a College-Level class I took. I'll see if I can get ahold of that..

******data

Answer 1

After Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans the nazi feds/cops took law abiding citizens guns!!!! It's on the NRA site. Including an old lady getting beaten down by a bunch of storm trooper thug cops......caught on film!

Modern day "Brits????"

Answer 2

Good question. I think you may have misunderstood the intentions of that amendment written by our country's founding fathers. Yes, although the British were a potential threats, the main purpose of the amendment was for civilians to be able to defend themselves from an oppressive government. (Our founding fathers were much more involved with civil liberties than our current day presidents.)

There are many scenarios where this may be necessary. In an emergency where police can not protect you (Katrina comes to mind), guns may be your last line of defense against looters and rioters. Another scenario may be if the police and the government decides to illegally arrest all political dissidents, such as when Hitler ordered the arrests of all Jews, guns may be your last hope. Although one may argue they are useless against an organized military, I would argue it is better than nothing.

Nations with lower homicide/suicide rates have greater gun control? I would have to see some of your proofs. Even if this is true, you must look at other variables such as education, GDP, geography, culture, etc. I must question, if guns were unavailable, would the violent offenders have been able to commit similar crimes with other types of weapons?

Answer 3

guns are not at the root of violence in the US or anywhere else. the root of violence here is the breakdown of the family unit and the moral corruption of society at large. in previous ages there were standards taught at home on how to act in an acceptable manner. as the family broke down, especially in the 1960's these moral concepts were abandoned for self gratification. The more ME centered, spoiled and irresponsible each generation becomes the more violence and crime in general will come to the forefront.

do we need the second amendment? in a word, YES. the protection of person and property are essential to any free person's life. look at 9/11. one group of people god rest their heroic souls, had the courage to stand up and fight for their survival and the well being of others. they had the courage to risk their own lives in mortal combat against the forces of evil. they lost their fight to survive, but the foiled a plot that would have taken many more lives. the other groups on the other planes had no such courage, and the terrorists found their marks. I ask you now, do you think that those terrorists would have succeeded if even 5 individuals on each of those flights had exercised their right to bear arms and defend themselves? Would the terrorists have attempted this plan if they knew that the passengers on those flights would likely be armed? I think not.

Answer 4

This is what jackasses like these stuffy, prudish, committee- forming, Elisabeth Hasselback types are ignorant of...you may make all the laws in the world banning something as socially unacceptable like guns-attach to it the most ghastly punishments available & at the end of the day the bad guy will still who he is...and because you have now made such strict, stringent laws banning all law abiding citizens from using guns...guess what, Mr. Bad Guy is the only one in the room still armed & ready for battle! The study and application of war and it's principles-was always, is now and will always be relevant! It's the deciding/ final factor of much debating...disputing and quarreling, and if you are not happy in learning the arts of war to better prepare yourself for the rainy day, then I'm positive that the next man will be all too happy to do so!

Answer 5

When guns were banned in England and Australia, crimes with guns went up because criminals didn't turn in their guns and they knew most people were easy victims. The US isn't any more violent than most other societies, but violence here is reported at a higher rate than most other places, and liberals use that as an excuse to ignore the fact that gun bans cause crime and cry for a gun ban here. I refuse to be a victim, so I will not disarm. I have a 10mm Glock in my pocket now, and it would not be a good idea to try to steal it from me...

Answer 6

Do you think greater Gun Control would lead to less violence?
No!
You are right, the US is a violent country and this is why we have the right to bare arms.
You have gangs and war lords and well, your regular dumbasses and let me tell you, if some idiot wants to try and bust through my door again, i will pull the trigger on this shotgun.
I don't want to, i hate guns, i get scared even looking at this thing. But, when i had our first child, 3 men tried to forcefully break in but were greeted by my pit bull who showed them a full smile!!! they took off but came back 3 weeks later with a chain (wrapped around his fist) a knife and rope!
Now, i'm all alone in my house with my 2 month old, what the heck am i supposed to do. Just sit there and watch them kill my baby as they rape me?
I think not. I would shoot them deader than hell.
But, someone breaking an entery or threatening the lives of my children or myself and husband is when i would use that gun, othersie, it is locked up and out of view. My kids can't get to it, they don't even know it exists!
I think if we're going to control guns, we need to control these gangs out there who thrive of off drive-bys and killing 2y/o or shooting people randomly in road rage!
But, in the real world, i can't see it ending.

Answer 7

I would question the validity of those statistics, in many countries with stricter gun control laws there is less control or availability of data.

I would also question whether gun control would decrease any crime other than impulse crimes or domestic violence. It most likely would not decrease the amount of gang related violence.

Answer 8

Many other countries have the same gun laws as the US, millions and millions of people around the world own guns and don't have the same problems with violence as we do. I think that we should be able to own a gun, but people need to be more educated about how to properly use one.
Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

Answer 9

actually you need to do some more research america isn't
the number one violent country on the earth at this point in time...

yes its still relevant even more so after 9/11....americans
have the right and the NEED to defend themselves and
thier country from both the common criminal and foreign
terrorists...

Answer 10

enable me placed it this form. In an extremely ethical and civilized society, human beings completely work together through persuasion. rigidity has no place as a valid approach of social interplay, and the only situation that removes rigidity from the menu is the own firearm, as paradoxical because it may sound to a pair. as quickly as I carry a firearm, you are able to no longer cope with me by ability of rigidity. you need to use reason and attempt to cajole me, by way of fact I even have the thank you to negate your threat or employment of rigidity. The firearm is the only own weapon that places a one hundred-pound lady on equivalent footing with a 220-pound mugger, a seventy 5-year previous retiree on equivalent footing with a 19-year previous gang banger, and a single guy on equivalent footing with a carload of under the impact of alcohol adult men with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in actual capability, length, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender. A mugger, even an armed one, can in easy terms make a powerful residing in a society the place the state has granted him a rigidity monopoly. Then there is the argument that the gun makes confrontations deadly that for the period of any different case might in easy terms consequence in injury. This argument is wrong in numerous techniques. without weapons in contact, confrontations are gained by ability of the bodily stronger social gathering inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. The gun is the only weapon it particularly is as deadly in the palms of an octogenarian as that's in the palms of a weight lifter. It in simple terms does no longer artwork as nicely as a rigidity equalizer if it wasn't the two deadly and fairly employable. The gun at my element ability that i won't be in a position to be pressured, in easy terms persuaded. i do no longer carry it by way of fact i'm afraid, yet by way of fact it facilitates me to be unafraid. It does not cut back the movements of people who might work together with me through reason, in easy terms the movements of people who might gain this by ability of rigidity. It removes rigidity from the equation, and that's the reason donning a gun is a civilized act.