In the second amendment in the constitution says that the United States people have the right to bear Arms. " 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." So it's saying that we have the RIGHT to bear arms! Whether it's for personal Defense or if the government tries to take over, (guns) will allow us to overthrow the government if they were to take over. If we had gun control we would not be able to overthrow our government! We would have nothing to fight back with! Our founding fathers made sure to put the second amendment in the constitution so that, "WE THE PEOPLE," would all have fire arms to overthrow the government if or when it takes over. Guns don't kill people , people kill people! If someone were to leave a gun on a table, the gun would not just start firing! It takes a person to pull the trigger! Guns are not the problem, people are.
Over the past week or so, i have read numerous gun control articles, and not one of them made any logical sense. In one article, the author was explaining why guns are the most efficient way to kill. The author said, and i quote, "Knives are lethal in the right hands, but they can only kill one person at a time and have no ability to kill at a distance." (http://theprogressivecynic.Com/debunking-right-wing-talking-points/refuting-gun-enthusiasts-anti-gun-control-arguments/) Yes, knives can only kill one at a time, but knives do have an ability to kill at a distance. They can be thrown. It may seem difficult, but with a good knife, some time, and a tree, one can attain sufficient skill to kill a person with a thrown knife. I could go on and on for days, but I am going to stop here. If you want, go ahead and read the article. It is truly enlightening on how illogical their arguments are.
The whole point of so called gun control is to keep those who should not have guns from obtaining them. These people would be considered criminals, would they not? I am just curious as to when criminals started following the law. If someone could please inform me that would be great.
Though many of the "no" people believe that the 2nd amendment was for the 1800's and not 2000's, the truth is people are still going to harm other people no matter how innocent the other person is. Another thing is that if the average person does not have a gun then they cannot protect themselves when they are threatened. Finally if the average Joe has a gun out in the open where others can see then no one will threaten them as the threat of a gun is in the right hands.
I think that we should be allowed to own guns, but only to a certain point like pistols, rifles, shotguns, and low powered sub-machine guns at most. I don't think we need weapons like rocket launchers and light weight machine guns, just to be able to hunt and protect ourselves from modern day society. Criminals find ways to get illegal guns and i wouldn't want to be on the other side of it without a gun.
Who ever said that criminals will stop to think about if the weapon they are using is legal or not. CRIMINALS DON"T FOLLOW THE LAW. Let's say that there are two people, one has a gun legally, and never thought about doing a crime with this weapon, this gun has been registered, so the government knows that it exists. Then there is a criminal who owns a gun, and is probably going to do some crime with it, this gun was bought illegally, because he has a criminal record and legally can't buy a gun. So this gun isn't registered, and the government doesn't know it exists. The government comes to take away all guns. They will only go places where they know that there are guns, so the guy that has a legal, registered gun gets his taken away. While the other guy, who's gun the government doesn't know about. How will the government know to take away his gun, if they don't even know that he has a gun. Even if his gun was registered, he would just go to the black market, and get himself a gun. Now that no one but criminals has guns they can do whatever they want, and there will be no one to stop them.
Yes I get the reason why people say gun control is good but if you think about it humans where still harming eachother before guns where invented, guns are used for hunting, and a way of protection if you take away that sense of safety then no family is going to even be happy in there own homes.
If the government controlled guns, what would stop them from controlling us? I mean seriously, if we can't defend ourselves, who is going to trust the government? I certainly wouldn't. Also, if people break the law and kill people, why wouldn't serial killers break the law and get guns? I would much rather have a gun to defend my self in that situation. Gun control won't end murder.
Without guns so many different things would have not been created. Kevlar is a great material that can take impact from a high velocity object. Guns are why the world is so advanced because guns were just one idea that just lead to others. Without guns the entire world would still be fighting with swords and sticks. Guns are what got food on the table and guns are why we were able to rebel from England, and win the World Wars.
There's little wrong with background checks to keep criminals from legally purchasing guns and with restrictions on fully automatic weapons. However, what generally happens is that anti-gun folks like to overreach and aim to enact gun bans or make it so difficult to own and purchase guns that it basically amounts to a gun ban. The problem is that gun control laws almost always target law-abiding citizens. Furthermore, the laws always try to regulate to extreme cases, e.G., "Assault-Weapons" bans to prevent another Columbine. This makes for bad laws that do nothing to reduce gun violence while also fully respecting the second amendment. Furthermore, this leads to intense distrust of government and makes it that much harder to enact laws that actually might make a difference. What anti-gun folks need to keep in mind is that everyday, tens of millions of law-abiding gun owners do NOT kill or shoot or even threaten anyone. If we start from this premise, we can make a difference instead of helping to polarize both sides of this issue.
No, I believe gun control is a good thing. Gun control keeps this country safe, and without it, people everywhere would be pulling the trigger. We are safer and still alive because of gun control. Not having gun control would have more criminals walking around with guns and in just a few seconds, able to pull the trigger and kill an innocent man. So I say no, gun control is a good thing.
The second amendment was a 18th century law that was for the 18th century. The main arguement is that if i had a gun like at a school and someone attacked, a normal citizen is not trained to be in that kind of situation. He or she might shoot the wrong person or worse, fail and the gunner goes off and kills many more people. Nevertheless, my basis is that there shouldn't be any guns, and if your saying that guns will protect you from the tyranny of the government, well good luck defending yourself from a drone with your assault rifle. Thus, my basis is that guns are not needed in this country. Only about 5% of the country owns guns. Yes, in some rural areas, guns are needed, but the majority of us in this country do not need guns.
You people are idiots. Imagine if America had NO gun control. Terrorist groups like ISIS, Al Qaeda and Taliban would be all over America, buying guns to export them to other countries or maybe even use them in an attack. Imagine a Paris attack in America where all the terrorists are armed with guns the fucking military should have. You idiots really think your guns will protect you in an attack? You'll be dead before you could even pull it out. Not to mention all the gun accidents and firefights every fucking year. Citizens shouldn't even have guns, we just kill ourselves with them.
Gun control is not bad at all because, there should even be anyone having a gun except for the police, for emergency's only. If anyone can get a hold of a gun, then who knows what could happen next. I Don't even think the police needs guns. If no one had guns and the police had tazers, then the U.S. would become a more safer place to live in.
The city in the state of Georgia with the least crime is Kennesaw. It is the only city to require every household to have a gun. Just think, if this were applied to cities with high crime rates, such as Detroit, the crime rates would go down tremendously. This would not be possible without gun control. This is probably a different route that you'd expect. I am a democrat. I believe that areas with high crime rates should require every household to own a gun. If everyone owned a gun, burglars would think twice before they tried to break and enter into a house. The Colorado Dark Knight Shooter went to 7 different theaters before he found one that was a gun free zone. No gun-free zone should ever exist. Yes, there should be a proper background check. I once read that a man drove without a license, and became a felon. Then, he joined the military for 20 years. When he retired, he could not own a guy. I think that's bulls***. If you are in the military for 8 years or more, I'd exempt anyone from not being able to buy a gun, provide they are properly evaluated. If every household in the United States was required to own a gun, crime rates would drop significantly.
Some may say that this is not gun control. What's gun control? It's gun control when the government controls who can and can't have guns.
In this world, there are so many shootings and if one person is seen with a gun, they can be arrested. It is true that man kills man, not guns. But guns should not be trusted with citizens because they cannot be trusted. Only authority should be trusted with guns
It's time to give up the toys. No more arguing about being defenseless if you don't have a gun chances are they won't either. I've never heard of stories where someone actually killed someone for murdering a family member. What are you so scared of that makes you need to own a gun?
It only takes one person to ruin it for everyone and that seems to be the case and point here, except it's more than just one person or incident. There's no need to spout out a bunch of facts that says people with guns kill people, we all know that. It's time for a change and I believe America is a big kid now and can handle this change. Drop the guns, learn to throw knives.
If you didn't have gun control anyone could buy a gun, bad people could get there hands on one and go crazy. People with a record or with mental health issues that are unstable could go and buy a gun and just start shooting people. No one would be able to stop them unless they were willing to hurt the person. It would all be easier if the only people that were aloud to get a gun were people in law enforcement and at the end of the day you would have to turn in your gun. Crime would go down and so would murders.
This will be in the form of a rebuttal to a possible argument. Many would argue that, if the mentally disabled can't have guns due to the fact that some of them have engaged in criminal activity, neither can White people because they have been born into an environment making it inevitable that feel a sense of subliminal entitlement and prejudice towards others, as demonstrated by their frequent shootings. This argument, however, is incredibly stupid. Firstly, let me address its lack of ACTUAL evidence. These are just baseless claims. Please, find me a piece of MEDICAL evidence that supports that whites are just as incapable of dealing with firearms as the mentally disabled. There is none, exactly. Now, one of course could say that it doesn't have to be medical and is demonstrated by our abundance of shootings, however, that is also a not very smart argument to prove that point. That's just like saying that Muslims can't deal with any weapons because they are exposed to an environment that encourages terrorist activity from their birth, as demonstrated by the minority of them that commit terrorist attacks. That's also like saying that neither Germans nor Japanese can handle weapons, as demonstrated by WW2. That's ALSO like saying that no black people can handle weapons because of Chicago, New York, L.A., and Baltimore gang activity. As you can see, if we keep on using these arguments we will eventually reach a point in which not a single person can own weapons. Now, you might be saying, "Isn't that the same for people with Bipolar disorder or Schizophrenia?' No, in fact it isn't. They, as stated before, have a mental disability that makes it many times impossible for them to deal with firearms. It has been medically proven. And yes, not all of them have the same capability, as there are different versions of the diseases, however, here is a completely viable solution. We issue out several government appointed medical experts that are equipped to assess one's capability of becoming violent due to their disorder. These people, because they are from our government, won't hold any violence under penalty of fine and/or imprisonment. They will assess all people who have been diagnosed by local experts and test whether or not they should be allowed to own a firearm. The diseases tested will include but are not limited to; Bipolar disorder, Schizophrenia, Trichotillomania, Depersonalization disorder, Factitious disease, Schizoaffective disorder, as well as others that might not have been named. So there you go.
Because I said so yeah! No really, it's that people, like EVERYONE, could have the permission of having a gun in their hands. But what if this person is crazy? And just because he doesn't like someone he kills him? I know that there is not a big chance that this happens, but still! Maybe someone could kill someone by accident! If a kid finds a gun, hat will he do? He can shoot someone!! People with guns should at least a permit! My opinion is that only police should have guns. Almost all the countries in the world don't permit guns so what, like the countries WITH guns that are now not allowed of guns will die because they "can't protect themselves"?