Amazon.com Widgets

Would it be a good thing if everyone had a handgun for the safety of their family?

  • Yes.

    I would absolutely hate myself if my family was hurt in any way because I didn't have a good handgun at the ready. I think each family should have some means of protecting themselves, and if that means having a handgun then so be it. It's better than getting somebody killed

  • I interpret it to mean if everyone had a RIGHT to a handgun.

    How many Nazis could the Jews have taken out if they weren't defenseless? Guns are our protection against the government and against oppression.

  • Consider dis

    As it would be safer with no guns, people do have them and will use them. If you were being robbed in the middle of the night wouldn't you want a gun? People worry about accidents with a gun in the house but if it was kept in a safe until its needed it will keep your kids from getting into it and will keep you safe.

  • Live in a rural community.

    I support gun control. But I live in the country. I have seen enough incidents with wild animals to know that guns can be useful. Like that time a bobcat got into my house. My 17 year old was babysitting her two younger brothers, (I left for work at 7am) while my children were sleeping it came in though the crawlspace into the basement and was just wandering around eating cat food. My daughter heard it and came to investigate. Thank god for the sheriff. They scared it off. We got the hole sealed were it came in but it could have been worse. Nothing was shot but still if it had rabies (the police suspected it did because it wasn't afraid at all) this could have been very bad for my kids.

  • On the fence

    Yes and no. Not everyone should carry a gun or own. I'm a former marine. I know the insides and outs of firearms. I'm all for our constitutional rights but will accidental discharges we need to increase a stronger and more effective awareness of the use and functions of a firearm. What would be much more effective is mandatory trigger locks, high quality not cheap. Think $150+. Also in order to buy, handle, or even rent a firearm there should be a mandatory course that drills weapon safety and basic functions of firearms. Too many people will buy a handgun because they can and know absolutely nothing on how to handle, clean, or even fire the thing. Also ammo should be kept in a lockbox of some sort at least in a separate room of the house. Owning a firearm can keep you safer but we need to thoroughly educate those who intended to own and use a firearm of any kind.

  • If they were responsible, yes.

    If they taught their children about gun safety and that gun crimes are wrong, but learned to use them properly, it would be good. If everyone were equally matched against criminals, criminals would change their minds. My parents have let me and my siblings fire guns since we were eight, because we were in a controlled environment and they taught us how to use them. We have never had a gun accident in our family.

  • Everyone except criminals.

    Basically yes. If everyone owned a handgun excluding criminals, insane people, etc, most violent crimes could not be committed because they would almost certainly be stopped. It would be a good thing for everyone to own a gun, and it has been proven to work in other countries.

  • Would it make society safer? Yes.

    If literally everyone had a handgun, criminals would almost certainly think more than twice about waltzing into a home trying to steal/rape/murder/ect. Evidently 98% of robbers say they wouldn't go into a home if they knew someone in their was armed. Speaks for itself I say.

  • Definitely

    I believe that if everyone had a gun it would be safest, or at least if a majority people have a gun it would be safest, this is simply because criminals are afraid of gun owners and more specifically their guns. Therefore, criminals would be deterred.

  • Yes. Would you want your children dead?

    If someone walks into your house with another gun... How will you protect yourself or your family? Just sit there while the killer is killing your family? No... You would save your family... But if someone had a gun and you didn't how would you do that? They can easily shoot you with a gun while you can only protect yourself with a knife? They can see you grab the knife and shoot you on the spot... With a gun you don't have to get close to them to protect you... To protect your family...

  • Handguns yes.... Bullets NO!

    This way you can look really though and scare away all those bad guys trying to get in your house, but you won't risk shooting yourself in the foot or taking down one of your kids thinking it's a bad guy stealing a glass of milk in the middle of the night.

  • You Mericans (well some of you) are nuts!

    I'm glad in not living in the USA, the lack of mass shooting in Australia is the proof that responsible gun control is needed to stop the daily bloodshed in your country.

    At least our politicians possess the common sense to ban high powered after the Port Arthur massacre.

    The AR-15 sole purpose is to kill people effectively, and something like that has no reason to be available to just about anyone.

  • Though many say that people kill people, it is actually guns that promote violence.

    Americans believe that keeping a handgun in the house makes them safe, when it really does the exact opposite. So many accidents that could have been prevented occur each year, because people are not equipped to handle the guns that they feel are protecting them. People should strive to protect themselves non-violently.

    Posted by: NondescriptKevin
  • I disagree because, if everyone had access to a handgun, that would create more problems with shootings and criminal behavior.

    I think that handguns should be made available to those who prove themselves to be competent law-abiding citizens. I think that if everyone had a handgun, or every family had a handgun, in their home, that would create more problems than it would be helpful to maintaining their safety. There are new statistics stating that somewhere around one third of Americans, at one time in their life, will need to seek professional help for a mental health issue. If those one third were to have access to a handgun during a time of crisis in their lifetime, if severe enough, the outcome could be tragic.

    Posted by: UnsuitableRigoberto99
  • Don't get a handgun

    Get a shotgun! Why get a handgun when you could get something a lot more powerful for about the same price. It is much easier to hit a target with a shotgun than a handgun as well. However I would advise taking a gun control class and most definetly keeping it out of reach of children.

  • Handguns in the home have statistically been shown to increase the likelihood of deaths in the home.

    Not every family should have a handgun in the home, as it will likely increase the number of deaths due to accidents or homicide. Certainly, every family wants to feel safe against intruders, but handguns only increase the chances of a child finding the gun, or an argument turning into a violent death. Handguns only provide the illusion of safety, while actually increasing the risk of death between family members.

    Posted by: P3nrIin
  • Guns only bring destruction.

    According to statistics from "TheGuardian", more than 60% of human-caused deaths involve the use of a gun. This just shows how much of a negative impact guns have on a country. It's not really protection if everyone including criminals, psychologically-disturbed people, and even people with addictions owned guns firearms. If less people owned firearms, then automatically less protection will be needed. However I do feel that some extreme cases such as police missions, safety for government officials, and witness protection might require guns. It is severely risky to trust all humans with guns and expect that to be a form of protection.

  • Only for certain people.

    I do support the fact that Americans can have firearms for protection, especially since ISIS is coming around. But, if firearms get in the wrong hands, then havoc will break out. For me, it's a 50 50 chance. I think there should be permits for people who are trusted (which makes absolutely no sense). This is a difficult question..

  • Too many hotheads and self-declared heroes

    I hear the argument that people would be loathe to start a fight if they knew the other had a gun. I don't buy that. Too many minor altercations would escalate if everyone was "packing". Also, consider the possibility that, in an active shooter situation, a helpful citizen gets shot by another helpful citizen who mistakes the other for a bad guy.

  • Would it be better if everyone had a gun? ...Or No One had a gun?

    I would say that if no one had a gun it would be much safer for me and my children if no-one was allowed to have a gun. I accept the argument that if someone came into my house with a weapon, and wanted to kill me and my family...It would be nice to have a gun, but if they could only get a knife to fend me off, me and my family would be much better off. At least I have a fighting chance instead of getting shot in the head when I hear glass break.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.