the news article about that crazy man in nebraska shooting people so that he cud be famous really scares me. i'm afraid for myself and my family cos this cud happen anywhere in the us..
why so much hesitancy and debate over gun control issues.. isnt it obvious that the guns for "self defence" is being abused
just ban the damn things
2007-12-05 23:35:03 · 26 answers · asked by duh 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Next we can ban knives, baseball bats, cars, fishing line, rope? Maybe we could just make it illegal for anyone to go out in public. I say put more guns out there, these dumbclucks wouldn't be so ballsy if they knew everyone else had a gun. Just think how much nicer everyone would be too if everyone knew that everyone else was packing.
2007-12-05 23:46:29 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
American has the second highest rate of gun violence in the world and murders. Why does this high rate of gun crime not happen in other countries that allow guns legally?
As someone pointed out guns don't kill people but they do make it a lot easier for the murderer to do so. If the same argument is followed then bombs don't kill people maybe they should be sold in Wal-Mart as well.
Guns do not make people safer but more unsafe. If you were to be mugged at gun point would the mugger really wait for you to reach for your gun or shot you for trying, I don't see many Cops having problems with this. Having a gun increases you chance of being killed as the mugger is worried that you may have a gun and be trigger happy for his own safety.
Why can people get semi automatic weapons, I understand shooting rifles? You can't go hunting with them, there would be nothing left of the deer. The only reason people carry semi automatic guns or hand guns is to kill.
Greater restrictions should be placed on these weapons and hopefully next month there won’t be another shooting, seems like these happens all the time nowadays.
Second constitution states that "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." surely this means that if the country is under threat and you are part of a militia you have the right to arms. No matter how many ways I read it can I see that everyone has the right to guns.
2007-12-06 00:01:19 · answer #2 · answered by clint_slicker 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
If you had a gun ban you could add a gun charge to the numerous murder charges he would have faced had not killed himself. Do you really think there is any deterrent effect in that threat? Oh, you think that the government really could manage to keep guns out of the hands of crazies like this. OK why don't we start with crack and heroin and when the government can keep those off the streets maybe we will trust them to keep other illegal items out of the hands of outlaws. Until then I would prefer to have the right to defend myself from these crazy people.
What would have happened if there had been an armed law abiding citizen next to the shooter after the first round went off? 8 fewer dead, right?
2007-12-06 00:02:11 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The gun he used was stolen. Innocent people shouldn't be punished for the acts of criminals. If he didn't use a gun he could have also made a bomb and maybe killed even more people. When you are that insane you can be creative. He would have found a way to kill people whether he had a gun or not. Wish someone had knew him well enough to get him some help before he hurt so many innocent people.
2007-12-06 11:49:05 · answer #4 · answered by Leroy J. 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
"why so much hesitancy and debate over gun control issues.. isnt it obvious that the guns for "self defence" is being abused
just ban the damn things"
We already banned people from killing each other, enough said.
2007-12-07 20:14:00 · answer #5 · answered by rob s 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If we ban guns, then why not ban every tool that has taken human life. How about cars, they kill more people everyday,should we ban them? Airplanes kill people should we ban them? It's not the gun that kills it's the person behind it. what the government needs is better control over the nut cases, criminals, violent crime offenders, gangs, mobs. Then and only then will our nation trully be safe. But, to take away our rights as free citizens to bare arms leaves ourselves open to many things out of our control.
2007-12-05 23:54:00 · answer #6 · answered by claiborne022 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
That would be an immediate civil war because people like me (and there are many of us) stand firm on the right that we have to bear arms. I would kill or be killed to keep this right.
There are two times in recent history that guns were taken from the citizens - the Nazi's did it, resulting in the Holocaust, and the state of Missouri did it in the 1830's to the Mormons, which led to the extermination proclamation that legalized killing the unarmed Mormons.
I will not give up that right. Is it worth trying?
2007-12-05 23:49:07 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
A mentally disturbed person, broke the law and utilized a tool to kill others.
Safe law abiding citizens with no tools to defend themselves, died.
Wether you like firearms or not, they are the right of each American, protected by the founding fathers insistance by being protected by the 2nd and perhaps 9th amendments to the Constitution. They are however to protect against tyranny. The right to use them for personal defense, hunting, target shooting etc are mearly side benefits.
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; (See anything similar in the VT shootings?) they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." Thomas Jefferson 'Common-place book,' 1774-1776 Quoting from on crimes and punishment, by criminologict Cesare Beccaria, 1764
The right to bear arms is a choice. If you do not believe in utilizing them, you are not required to. But its inclusion in the Constitution makes it no less than the right to free speech etc... How you speak for example is entirely up to you.
For the poster that says the Constitution does not protect the right to bear arms... might want to research the founding fathers intentions at the time. It was 'common' for all adult males to carry firearms at all times. The militia was 'EVERY' male 17-65' and able to bear them. You cannot have the citizenry 'rise' up to protect the nation from tyranny if citizens are not armed.
'On every question of the Construction of the Constitution let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.' 12 Jun 1823 Thomas Jefferson
Same answer I posted 20 minutes ago for same question asked on yahoo.
Edited: We are not hiding behind the 2nd Amendment, it is plain and simple, it is the right of the People (note it is capitlized), and it will not be infringed. Note the People is every citizen in every instance of the Constitution, cannot say it 'means' something different in the 2nd Amendment unless you change all the other instances. The 'milita' of the time was 'every citizen. Use the definition of the day it was written, not 'what you want it to mean now to get your way'.
Edited: "Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Ben Franklin
2007-12-05 23:51:42 · answer #8 · answered by Destrier 4 · 5⤊ 1⤋
What is keeping the government from banning guns are people like me who believe in the 2ed amendment . I know that this has been said over and over but there a lot of other things in the U.S. that are used to kill more people than guns. The key word is used because guns, cars,knives and any thing else that can be used to kill has one thing in common there is a person controlling them.
2007-12-06 00:39:36 · answer #9 · answered by hdean45 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Nebraska and other previous shooting (specially in schools) in a so-called civilized society does not reflect positively neither is a good sign for the future. Banning on guns is not the solution, but setting-up special community centers with in a neighborhood and helping citizens out of depression, social and personal problems can help greatly to combat this aggrandizing situation.
It is a HILL-TOP task but can be achieved if govt. become serious with the help of the community.
2007-12-06 00:02:56 · answer #10 · answered by Peripatetic 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋