Amazon.com Widgets

In today's society, should people have a right to bear arms to protect themselves and their property?

  • I believe this is a fundamental right, although buying an AK-47 is not.

    I still believe that being able to protect yourself and your property is a fundamental right. But that right does not mean that citizens should be free to buy machine guns or weapons of mass destruction. There needs to be common sense on this issue. I live way out in the country and I would not feel safe without a gun in the house - we are too far remote for the law to arrive in time.

    Posted by: Th4Fire
  • We have the right to self-defense .

    Criminals with the intent to commit a violent crime will not consider the laws in place to legally obtain a weapon. Keeping this thought in mind, saying that the people do not have the right to bear arms is equivalent to saying that people have no right to protect themselves.

  • Youre not getting my guns!

    A mentally ill man killed the students, not the guns. If no guns, it could be done another way!

    I have the right to bear arms; protection & hunting (Deer, etc) and survive if need be.

    This is just another way that the government is using it's power in the wrong way, by trying to enforce unnecessary gun laws.

    Spend more resources on places most vulnerable to situations like these.

    If local, State, Federal, and multi-billion dollar corporations would stop cutting back on staff, and other policies....stuff like this might be preventable.

    Don't forget about the FOR PROFIT healthcare system we have that is almost useless? Where's the help for mentally ill people?

    The school shooting is ALL due from the ground up. Meaning from Local, State, Federal, and the Healthcare system that has FAILED!

  • Why should we not

    If you look at what the 2nd Amendment states then it should be clear to you. We as citizens have a right to bear arms. I guarantee you that I will do whatever I can to protect myself, my family, and my property and even though the thought of shooting someone terrifies me, I WILL DO IT! And I should not be punished for it either, because I was just exercising my right as a U.S. Citizen.

  • guns are good

    There is no more need to own a pool than to own a gun. Under real world circumstances in the USA pools kill many times more kids than guns. What would you think of a government that came and took your pool away? Sure you can say "but you can't take your pool and kill me with it", or "if kids were exposed to guns as much as they were pools it would be different." However the bottom line still stands; Many more children drown in pools than die of gun shots. If this is because children are exposed to pools more or not doesn't change the fact that you would save many more children's lives by outlawing pools than outlawing guns. (Far easier to actually police pools as well)

  • 911 Whats Your Emergency?

    If you have ever had to call 911, then you know how long it sometimes takes for a police officer to arrive to where you are at. In the time it takes to call the police and even wait for an officer to arrive, you and/ or your family could already be dead. So I say, Americans should have the right to Bear Arms to protect themselves and their family! (In the minute it takes to make that phone call, It could be used saving you and your loved ones lives)!

  • People should have the right to bear arms to protect themselves and their property but there needs to be greater restrictions on the type and number of guns that people are allowed to use.

    The right to bear arms is an important hallmark to the rights we are granted as US citizens. However, at the time the Bill of Rights was written, criminal violence was not the same problem it is today. Guns were used more often to hunt for dinner than defend your land. Today, guns should still be allowed to protect your person and property, but each person should be limited in how many guns they own, the type of guns they own, and the amount of ammunition that can be purchased. Gun laws should be in place so that there is a more comprehensive check on people buying guns and any person not working in law enforcement should be restricted to owning a low number of guns. It's important to enact stricter gun laws to protect the right to bear arms but also to protect society against growing violence.

    Posted by: RapidGarret59
  • What a coincidence!

    Isn't it funny how in the areas of the most gun control in America, the most murders are committed? Guns provide security and a sense of overall safety for some people, and quite frankly help them sleep at night. Even if guns are outlawed, who's to say criminal psychopaths will abide by those laws? Last time I checked, CRIMINALS DON'T ABIDE IN THE LAW.

  • Natural Rights of Mankind

    I believe in God given or natural rights. The Constitution of the United States was inspired by God, this was to be a government set up to allow people to govern their own lives. I believe that I have a right to defend my self and my family from danger. It is my responsibly to shelter my family, it is my responsibly to feed my family, it is my responsibly to protect my family. I also believe that if most others had this belief we wouldn't need so many government programs to take care of so many of us. I believe we are all children of a loving Heavenly Father and with faith in him and following his commandments he will help us get through life. The liberty framed in the United States Constitution is the liberty of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. This liberty allows us to be our own agents in living our lives to show God we can follow him with out being forced. God knew many would misuse this agency to exert force over others, this is the reason we have the right to be armed.

  • to important eyes

    Our government does not wish us Canadians to own anything and they are cowards I purchased a "Fake" replica P99 Blank firing gun I live in Arnprior Ontario Canada. The police came in Honda Odessey Mini vans and threatened me with "REAL" guns. Pointed at my head over a Fake gun how cowardly is that I couldn't hurt a cat with this thing or an ant even if I aimed at it all day and shot blank rounds at them may scare a cat but it would definitely not harm it yet they can put 1 through my head for having it. I am severely enraged by this. To add insult to injury the confiscated it (saw that coming) but did not return the funds I used to purchase it so in actuality they stole my property from me and now folks is that against the law? You tell me who the thugs are in Canada? I am a law abiding Citizen I don't do drugs and never will. And I don't drink and also never will. And I am mentally sound. So I love this country so much I want to be a U.S citizen give Canada the finger and live there.

  • Nopey Nope Nuddah.

    Universal access to gun ownership is stupid, careless and irresponsible. A lot of Gun nutters have posted on this site and others and most of them from their statements demonstrate the danger of having guns universally accessible. There are the police to defend property and persons. That is their job, that is why they are issued police guns! Have a gun amnesty offer a fair price for the guns and ammunition then implement regulated gun control and make the crime of owning a gun punishable by a heavy sentence.

  • I object strongly to gun ownership, esp. by "responsible citizens."

    In Deuteronomy 19:21, Exodus 21:24, and Matthew 5:38 in the Christian and Jewish Holy Bible it mentions the phrase "An eye for an eye and and a tooth for a tooth"...Well that meant that if someone in your family was killed or hurt, injured, and the like, that you had the right to defend them as well as yourself by killing them. That took place in Old Testament times. This is the modern world, so just because someone kills someone or hurts someone in your family or you, doesn't give you the right to use deadly weapons to defend yourself. Let the police deal with those people. Guns are not needed.

  • Less guns, equals less murders

    By having guns, the number of murders goes down. Just look at Canada, they have strict rules on carrying guns, and they also have far, far less murders and crime than the US. See the point? Numbers from 2002 state that the USA had 11,127 deaths by guns, while Canada had 165 deaths!

  • There are too many crazy people out there!

    After today's tragedy the school shooting in connecticut, the right to bear arms should be abolished. The main problem relies on the easy access to firearms which are used by mentally illed and crazy people whose intentions are not necesarily self-defense, rather are to kill others at public locations. How many more massacres have to happen in the US before they can control the issue? The easy accessibility of the arms and the lack of security in public locations, such as schools, malls, and movie theaters are the main ause of this problem. Not everybody is in their right mind to be morally responsible to carry a weapon. So why is this right available to everybody? Good and bad people? Shouldn't there be more limitation and control regarding this issue? No more violence! Enough is enough!!!

  • People kill people.

    The USA has a higher murder rate with the use of guns, when compared to it's neighbouring countries like Canada. Canada still allows certain gun use with liscences to ween out the crazy. Althoug it is not 100 percent accurate, there are way less deaths then in the USA. Check it out! When the 2nd ammendment first came to mention rights to guns it was long before all of these mass shootings. Besides what are you protecting yourselves from, citizens with other guns? If laws were stricter and only permited the law and hunters to carry guns there would be less fear. Besides there are many other ways to protect ones self, defense classes, pepper spray and tazers. With guns, people usually die. Plus without proper training they are also not sfe to the user. With other methods it is more likely that people will survive to pay for their crimes. Why do you insist on guns. It is an old idea in your 2 ammendment that you still cling to know. Why even publish stories about school shootings, or random drive by shooting; when clearly alot of you are to stuck in your ways (your amendment) to try and put a stop to this insanity.
    If your right to guns is more precious to you then the lives these guns take, well I guess that's your right to be selfish.

  • The U.S. Constitution does not allow the right to bear arms

    The U.S. Constitution does not allow the right to bear arms; therefore no. "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." -The Second Amendment
    Notice that the amendment refers to "(a) well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free (s)tate". Then it refers to "the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". The "rights of the People" are not referred to common citizens, but to the militias previously mentioned. Unfortunately this has been misinterpreted, and as resulted in a completely different meaning of the phrase. But still, the facts remain: the Second Amendment gives the right to bear arms to state militias, not to common people.

  • 17,664

    I have been alive for 17,664 days...on not 1 of those days, not 1, have I ever needed a gun to protect myself from anything. You all seem very silly putting so much passion into something that is not likely to happen.

    If the Principal in Newtown had a gun you claim she could have blown his head off and all would have been well. That is TRUE, very very TRUE, however 1000 others possibilities could ave happened as well lets take a look shall we, if she had a gun

    1) She shoots and kills bad guy only he dies
    2) She shoots and misses hitting 4 other kids, 24 kids dead
    3) She shoots and misses hittin 7 other kids, 27 kids dead
    this can go on for a while
    x) She shoots and wounds him pissing him off so he shoots up 5 rooms and not 2 rooms killing 60 kids

    Why would anyone focus on the one possibility? An unlikely one at that. I mean I've sot guns 3 ties, its har dto hit what you're aiming at, and under fire, gotta be unlikely.

    You say if we turn in our guns only criminals will have guns. Well criminals dont have hand grenades or bazookas, why, because we know how to keep weapons out of peoples hands. This is false, if we can keep hand grenades away from criminals we can keep guns away in the same way, we dont even need to invent some new way we ready have it.

    We prohibit weed which kills no one and rally around guns which kill lots of people, how backwards is that?

    So as a matter of logic, more guns + more bullets = more people dead, less guns + less bullets = less people dead...for this there is no argument.

  • Image

    If they aren't being used to hunt food in some remote area, then it's about pretending to be a brave man with an extension to a miniscule penis. Cowards and paranoics need them to bolster low self-esteem and provide confidence. I respect disputes and protection with hand to hand - knives at most, in this people saturated world. The argument that we need to be protected from a tyrannical government is DOA. They have nukes and tanks. The puny pop guns that are only good for shooting little kids won't do squat against the bad govt. We've just gotta hope. Take a look at the Wikipedia pages on worldwide homicide rates. We're at a 4.2% rate. The rest of the developed countries are at about 1%. Including the UK, which has no guns, but a similar mix of ethnicities and racial problems, etc., and a similar patriotic mentality and history. Germany - extremely low murder rate. Japan, etc. All have no or very little gun ownership and murder rates at about 1%. Our murder rate is higher than that of many third world countries. Now look up the Wikipedia page on murders in the US alone. Look at the breakdown of method of murder over the past 50 years or so - almost a constant 4 to 1 ratio of murder by gun to any other means. There's the most likely explanation for the ratio of our murder rate to that of the rest of the developed world, right there. That and inflated self-image, status consciousness, and out over exposure to death and destruction entertainment. Massacres will be occurring at an exponentially growing rate over the next few years. I give it 25 years max before the 2nd amendment is substantially modified or abolished. The silly arguments will stop holding any water. Right now the water is just ice - easy to hold. The gun advocates voices are getting kind of shrill now... Cornered behavior trait.. It won't be long until they'll be seriously talking revolt. It will be fascinating to watch. I wouldn't want to hold their position going forward. No where to go but compliant....

  • Privilege Not A Right

    The right to bear arms should be a privilege not a right. In today's society if you think you are unsafe without carrying a gun you need to rethink that. If you are a hunter and have a licensed gun by all means use it in the woods, but to carry it around all the time infringes other peoples rights of feeling safe. Therefore the right to bear arms IS a privilege.

  • The right to bear arms is an antiquated idea that should be removed from our Constitution.

    The right to bear arms is an antiquated idea that should be removed from our Constitution. At the time the Constitution and Bill of Rights was written, the right to bear arms was thought to be necessary in case it again became necessary to raise a citizen army or militia to fight an outside enemy. That is no longer necessary as the United States has proved that it has the strongest armed forces in the world. Guns held by private citizens today are only harmful.

    Posted by: NatBIab

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Anonymous says2013-03-08T15:36:14.360
People should have guns