gun laws
2007-11-16 03:51:56 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Maybe they want America to
be more like the Middle East?
2007-11-16 03:58:22 · update #1
There should most obviously be restrictions.. SAM's.. ICBM's... lol... I always laugh when people say "No restrictions, we should be able to have anything the military has!"
So since there should obviously be SOME restrictions... where do we draw the line?
Personally.. I like the line where it is right now and see no reason to change that.
2007-11-16 03:56:11 · answer #1 · answered by pip 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
If one person in any of the Virginia Tech classrooms had a concealed weapons permit, that scenario would have ended with less lives lost. So you're saying that only the government should have weapons? Think about the dangers in that position.
2007-11-16 12:16:57 · answer #2 · answered by only p 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
It already is, to a certain degree. I mean you can't buy a rocket launcher or anything like that at your local gun dealer. If you are referring to automatic weapons, then I will help argue the point that if you are an upstanding tax payer with no record, what is the threat? This is not a conservative/liberal battle, it is a guarantee by the constitution. Only the fringe that is constantly trying to trash the constitution would argue against a civilian's right to bear arms.
It is one of our foremost and important rights. That's why it was instituted right after freedom of speech.
2007-11-16 12:00:23 · answer #3 · answered by TexasTrev38 5 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Because they don't like the idea of the government being able to take them over at the drop of a hat. On the other hand, a defenseless public is fundamental to liberal goals, as when they get in power, they don't like to be challenged. This is also why liberals seek to remove intellectuals from society when they gain power, and all who do not blindly support them are labeled as non-intellectual, then crazy, and then eventually they are killed altogether. All despotic movements begin with the disarming of the public. Liberalism is despotism in disguise.
2007-11-16 12:28:26 · answer #4 · answered by SithLord 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The Constitution and the Second Amendment
says that I can own and KEEP any weapon that
I want, except Military weapons which are mostly
automatic and there are regulations on those type weapons!! You cannot buy military weapons unless you can provide paperwork stating that you are a collector of such weapons and I believe that
some of the named weapons are made inoperable!!!!!!!!!!!
2007-11-16 12:18:49 · answer #5 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Anybody that has taken even basic US history knows that the reason our founding fathers included the 2nd amendment was so that the American people had a means to protect themselves against tyrannical governments and oppression. We can be rational about what type of weapons are necessary to protect ourselves. No nukes, but basic infantry weapons should be fine.
2007-11-16 12:12:16 · answer #6 · answered by VoodooPunk 4 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Why do Liberals insist upon attempting to infringe upon my Constitutional right to keep and bear arms?
As a military firearms collector,my collection spans WWI through Iraq,up to and including a civilian version of an M-4 assault rifle.Collection is legal,and since it's MY money and MY right, why should I be subjected to an infringement based on some Liberals "comfort factor"?
2007-11-16 12:02:10 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
well....i am a "liberal"....and i firmly believe that the only thing that will protect us from our own government is FEAR....fear of the part of the government of the people that they rule....and every government that's ever governed a disarmed populace has instead ruled a people that lived in FEAR of their government.
measures that infringe on the 2nd amendment, although less common in the last decade than those that target the 1st, are no less dangerous and unconstitutional. you can't pick and choose which parts of the constitution you support or do not support. its a package deal; to disavow any of it is to violate all of it.
2007-11-16 11:58:09 · answer #8 · answered by Free Radical 5 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Ancient Warrior Dogue - Why don't you quote the full 2nd Amendment?
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.
What is well-regulated about everyone in the country having unregistered military style weapons?
2007-11-16 11:58:22 · answer #9 · answered by Downriver Dave 5 · 2⤊ 5⤋
When the pinko commie islamofascists lunatics come down the street I'm going to have to be able to take them out with an RPG.
hahahahahahaha,
2007-11-16 12:06:03 · answer #10 · answered by WhereTheBuffaloRoam 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋