It is a basic freedom our founding fathers gave to us and once the Chinese invade we will be able to defend ourselves since the government wont be able to pay for their own weapons and what not. It definitely pisses me off though when people don't lock them up and kids get a hold of them then kill their grandmas. That is a parenting/ responsibility issue not a gun issue.
Evil doers are going to get weapons either way, might as well be able to defend ourselfs against them. Also it is in our constituion to be able to take up arms against our government incase they barge in illegaly into your home or becomes corrupt or w.E. So i belive that banning weapons for civilians will never and should never happen
People that do not bear arms tend to not be able to protect themselves causing them to be subject to crime. If we cannot bear arms then we may not be able to go on killing sprees... Or protect ourselves from them. I find that you can still murder with an item other than a gun but not protect yourself as easily. Making guns illegal won't help because people that will shoot others will not follow other laws.
Our founders created an amendment that allows our people to bear arms to protect from the government and others. If we do not have the ability to protect ourselves, what will we do? Are we just going to let the government pass a law to get rid of firemans. We should be able to bear arms as a way to protect ourselves from each other and the government.
Our founding fathers gave us the right, and guns have done much more good than bad, for sure. The USA secret service society (CIA) has seen what you have done (accomplishments, deeds) and decided you are would be good to hire you as a possible recruit for us. As a former recruit myself, I can tell you that this is not a trick or prank. This is urgent, because we obviously need more agents, as we are resorting to recruiting potential new agents like you. Please reply immediately, ASAP. Surprising as it is, you have been recruited for the CIA.
People, through the utilization of guns, certainly have caused many unfortunate massacres. However... As cliche as I know this is, guns don't kill people, people kill people. You must address problems at their route, try to understand what motivates people to do to this kind of thing. When people are that upset, disturbed, on edge and mentally unwell, someone needs to intervene before it gets to that stage. Besides, if you were to ban guns outright, it's enforcement would be extremely difficult, the opposition would be unbelievble. The right to bear arms is an important part of American culture, and I think an outright ban would risk a civil war type climate. America also has 300+ million guns which most of would just circulate the black market, even if people consented to confiscation in the first place, law abiding citizens would then immediately be in more danger as criminals operating on the black market will get their guns regardless.
(and make no mistake, it is), its about the basic HUMAN right to self defense.
Time and time again, its been proven that its better to allow people the option of fighting back in a dire situation than to allow them to be slaughtered. In the wake of the Kenyan Mall Massacre in which at least 61 people were killed, the Chief of Interpol is wondering aloud if it would have been better for people to bear arms and thusly repel/resist attacks of this nature.
Said Ronald Noble:
"Ask yourself: If that was Denver, Col., if that was Texas, would those guys have been able to spend hours, days, shooting people randomly?" Noble said, referring to states with pro-gun traditions. "What I'm saying is it makes police around the world question their views on gun control. It makes citizens question their views on gun control. You have to ask yourself, 'Is an armed citizenry more necessary now than it was in the past with an evolving threat of terrorism?' This is something that has to be discussed."
Its time for people to realize, if they haven't already, that the police and military cannot and will not be there to protect you at all times. For me, the choice isn't a choice at all, I am responsible for my safety and that of my loved ones. I will keep and bear arms and I will not entrust my life to some low rent security guard or police officer whose interest lies more in collecting revenue for the state than in my personal safety.
For those who STILL say we should rely solely on the police, please keep in mind that in the United States, the courts have ruled that they do not have an obligation to protect you. See Gonzales v Castle Rock and Deschaney v Winnebago County.
People should not be able to bear arms because people and guns have caused many deaths in the world, ( For example, The innocent lives lost in Syria and Kenya, The Trayvon Martin's case, The innocent children killed at school by a man, The Illinois shooting spree with the guy who pretended to be the joker). To reduce the crimes committed in our society, I say that we ban guns for good. "Monitored" cops should do a stop and search on any citizen and take there guns away from them.
Yes I know it's in the Constitution. It really shouldn't matter.
Jurists with a much stronger formation that all of us amateurs in Debate.Org don't all agree that the Constitution is a sacred cow that can't be touched. Some believe it is a key document that reflected the needs of its time and as such, it is subject to interpretation and modification. I strongly believe the right to bear arms is a time-specific requirement which made perfect sense when a young, newly formed nation had to defend its independence from a much larger colonial power with a larger professional army. But it does not make any sense now. The US Army is the largest in the world (likely too large, but that's a different topic). England mortgaged their underwear to us to get help during WWI and II -and then became pretty much our satellite. I know, Muslim extremists want to hurt us. Should we expect some bearded hick in Texas to take them down with his hunting rifle? Don't think so. That's what the Army is for.
And then there is internal violence. There are criminals, and some of them have guns. Our police forces are imperfect, sometimes downright inadequate. So should we, the ordinary citizens of America, own a Magnum so our children can grow safe? I think it's the exact opposite. Most of us, including the supposedly well trained members of the NRA, would be a danger to ourselves and to our fellow Americans with a gun in our hands. For each true criminal we could take down with good reason, we would take ten innocent citizens, some of them just because of racial prejudice, and some of them our own relatives or neighbors.
So accept that the Constitution is a live document and needs to be adapted to our times. Just like our Founding Fathers did not make any legal prevision for electronic surveillance, yet our present day lawyers deal with it every day.
I chose no because if you are not allowed to bear arms than how will people be able to threaten with a gun, they can't. If people say yes, someone can just storm in with a gun and kill all. That is my opinion, but i can see why people want guns. I hope that we can all decide.
I am a person who believes that most situations may be resolved by the use of words. Though I admit guns are necessary under certain circumstances I disagree that people should be allowed to bear arms. As soon as we start passing around guns murphy's law makes it clear that something with go awry. As cliche as it sounds, guna will fall into the wrong hands. Children are getting their hands on guns and everyone does not even bear arms yet. Imagine it each household contained weapons. Children, mentally unstable people, other people with mental issues. They all will end up getting their hands on guns. Let's not forget the Trayvon Martin case. The right to bear arms will drastically increase the rate of racist killings. I admit that guns can be used in self defence. However, where there are guns there will be murder. Is America truly ready to become a land of mindless bloodshed?