• Absolutely. Things changed.

    The founding fathers had this because they felt the need to for protection if the British ever came they could form their militia. Today, this amendment and the debate is heavily influenced by all our hunters out there. People these days own a gun for sport. I'm not saying that's wrong, but the way guns were precieved then and now are vastly different. I understand and support the need for security and protection, but it's beyond that. I'm not saying get rid of it all together, but revisal. Obviously with all the crime we have, we need to ensure the right people have them to protect themselves and get it out of the wrong. More checks and more education. The dangers the fathers forsaw still exist, but isn't the root motivation for keeping it.

  • Minimally? Yes they should.

    I believe that everyone has the right to bear arms yet we should restrict what arms we are talking about. Nobody in their right minds, except for soldiers, should be using military based arms in any circumstance. There is no need for the average Joe to be using them in public or in the private of their own homes. We need to stop giving these reckless people these dangerous military weapons and them injuring themselves and others.

  • It's definitely outdated

    The 2nd Amendment was created after the American Revolution, where the American's fought the British. The right to bear arms was a way of security to reassure the American people that they can protect themselves. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment has changed drastically, now that guns are used as a sport or for hunting. I'm not saying that we should completely remove guns from the American people, I just believe that the Amendment is really outdated for the modern uses.

  • Yes, The US is one of the few countries left in the western world where guns are so readily available.

    When the 2nd amendment was put in place the average gun was not a particularly useful weapon. It took ages to reload, had low accuracy, small range, and required a large number of men to operate them efficiently. Had the founding fathers anticipated the rapid evolution of the technology behind guns it is safe to assume that would have thought twice about putting it in the constitution. Guns have become a social impediment rather than the safeguard they were intended to be.

  • It needs to be abolished!

    No other nation on earth has such constitutional protection for firearms. It's absolute lunacy! The US has the highest murder rate in the developed world. If it's not due to gun ownership, then it's due to poverty and deprivation, which cannot be resolved properly due to the impotence of the US political system. What a shambles!

  • The 2nd Amendment Needs Revision, Not Abolition

    The political system gets a bad reputation for being "sexist", "racist", Etc. The judicial system is labeled in a similar fashion. The whole point of the Supreme Court is to analyze the U. S. Constitution, And figure out if certain amendments are unconstitutional in nature. The 2nd Amendment has yet to be proven to be unconstitutional, So there is that aspect. I feel as though there is a certain degree of hoplophobia in modern society. I have no problem with legal citizens who meet psychological requirements to possess a firearm in the United States. The problem with seeing if a person has the mental stability to purchase and own a firearm is difficult because of HIPAA. I do believe the 2nd Amendment needs to be revised to the point to wear citizens may legally own firearms; however, There need to be some psychological, And other areas, That need to be met before a citizen can own a firearm.

  • Why shouldn’t it be changed, shouldn’t even be a question.

    The amount of shootings there have already been this year is crazy how many? About thirteen in American it’s self. It needs to be changed. One man can now kills people within seconds. The 2nd amendment is outdated it was created way back where weapons had little to no accuracy and realoding was very slow now we have Assaukt rifles that can kill within seconds.

  • God said so

    God is a very smart man and because of the good christian child I am, I listen to him because his opinion is valid and guides my life choices. The constitution didn't listen to him and I am very offended by this because it offends my belief system and I don't approve

  • Training and Safety

    This is a public safety issue. I do not want to tell responsible gun owners they cannot posses guns. For sport, protection or hunting or whatever. But let me ask this. If you have to be trained to drive a car and take a performance and written test to drive a car doesn't it stand to reason that you should at the minimum have to do that to own and operate or purchase a firearm? This cannot be a frivolous type of training, it should be hands on and educational. Then after all training and certifications are met you can buy your guns by submitting your license. Its all about responsibility and accountability. If you own a gun you are responsible for that gun. If it is stolen you must report it. If you leave it unsecured and someone is harmed you are responsible both civilly and legally. Gun ownership should be both a right and a privilege. If you speed over and over again in a car your license is suspended, if you drive without a license you go to jail. If you commit a violent legally punishable act with or without a gun then you lose the privilege to gun ownership. Because if you can not control your emotions and judgment then you cannot be responsible enough to control a gun. I was in the military and I have shot many different types of guns. I will be honest I liked it. But I was not even allowed to hold it until I was trained on gun safety. We were trained to respect the gun and the circumstances of not respecting the gun. I am considered liberal by friends but I feel for those who are responsible gun owners are painted with a broad brush for being gun enthusiasts and its not fair. But those are the same people who should be lobbying for what I mentioned above. Those law abiding citizens and responsible gun owners also should not want people owning guns that do not possess either the temperament or the maturity or respect for those weapons that they should. The databases need to be updated and centralized. This will take work. But while you are training for your license to purchase this should give the authorities time to do a comprehensive background check and once you are licensed you will just show your license and you can do a condensed check after. If you are caught with a gun and you do not have the proper certs or training you go to jail and lose that right again. It will take time but it will work. Its about safety and responsibility. That's just my take

  • No, it should not be revised...

    An amendment to our constitution should only be revised if the purpose for it has changed. The 2nd Amendment was written for the sole purpose of keeping guns IN the hands of American citizens as a means for self defense, and a safeguard against a tyrannical government. Those dangers still exist today, and therefore the protection against those dangers should also.

  • The Founders knew exactly what they were doing when they wrote the 2nd Amendment.

    The Founders/Framers of the Constitution consciously created the "right to bear arms" amendment to free the citizens from a tyrannical gov't. Might I remind you that the Founders were afraid of a powerful gov't. Throughout history, the times when guns have been taken from a country's citizens by the gov't have not been noble ones. The biggest example being Nazi Germany before WW2. The Fascist Nazi regime did this so that the Jewish people and other citizens who would resist their rule would not be able to defend themselves. We all know that this worked for the Nazis. Pro gun control supporters love to use the recent shootings and massacres as a reason that gun control is paramount, however I would like to point out that there have also been mass murder situations where the criminal has used every day objects like a knife. I would also like to point out that some of these massacres could have been stopped if a teacher or worker at the scene was armed. To instill gun control and revise the second amendment is to leave yourself and others vulnerable to the Gov't, murderers, and in a rare case, a Russian or Chinese invasion (This is a joke, everybody chill). Gun rights is and always will be something that makes America, America.

  • The Founding fathers, creators of America, know more than you.

    Let alone, the second amendment was firmly based upon spreading the power. If the government took our guns, we cannot fight back, which then all the power is in the hands of one government which can be a forceful dictatorship. Take a look at Cuba, with very strict guns laws (as well as other laws), their people are deeply dependant on their government; when people rely on their government so much, they seem to lose motivation, which results in a decreasing economy. Not to mention, in Adolf Hitler’s (and other ruthless governments) plan for world control, gun constriction was part of his needs. "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing,” states the infamous Adolf Hitler. Needless to say, gun control will weaken American citizens.
    Without guns, we can’t protect ourselves from any crime. Importantly, by having access to firearms, people can shoot back at criminals. In school shootings, store robberies, or even terrorist manslaughter, people can protect themselves and can kill the criminal before any more damage happens. Additionally, the police can’t be 100% on time always. Law enforcement might be busy with other crimes and unable to save everyone from each other. Using common sense, criminals are less likely to attack knowing others have firearms. If criminals know people could shoot back, the crime will be unappealing to the suspect. Citizens are safer with guns, rather than without.
    Many people think banning guns will decrease crimes, such as murder, rape, robbery, and more. According to Bill Whittle, the United States ranks, by far, most firearms per capita worldwide, yet only ranks 111th for intentional homicide. Additionally, cities in America that have strict gun laws have higher murder rates rather than the cities that have fewer gun laws which have lower murder rates. Also, countries that have banned guns in the past, such as Germany, Cambodia, and China, turned against their citizens causing mass murder in their countries. So why not ban guns? The answer is simply because banning guns actually surrenders power to the irresponsible governments and to bloodthirsty criminals.

  • God said so

    Because the bible says so. O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

  • Revising the Second Amendment would place our liberties in peril

    The 2nd Amendment is a doomsday provision; we should never need it, but unfortunately tyranny is only one misinformed vote away. I much prefer a dangerous freedom to peaceful slavery hoping not to have my freedoms further trampled in the name of (insert your adjective here) justice. I find it fascinating that our politicians fear our guns. I'm glad they do so they think twice on trampling our rights. Even if they decide to try to confiscate our guns, there will be such a bloodbath that even contemplating such a move will prevent it. Those founding fathers knew that without the people being able to defend themselves that they would be easily enslaved by a popular tyrant. Winston Churchill said democracy in the Western World was 2 wolves and a heavily armed sheep deciding on what was for dinner; how has this changed based off the history of the 20th century?

  • The Constitution Should Not Be Changed

    We have the basic ground rules for America: the Constitution. We
    cannot change it. I want my rights. Nobody will every make it better. We need those ground rules to keep the gov in check. Guns are our right as long as the military has them. If we start giving up or changing our rights now we wont have soon wont have any.

    Posted by: D.14
  • Why shouldn’t it be changed, shouldn’t even be a question.

    The amount of shootings there have already been this year is crazy how many? About thirteen in American it’s self. It needs to be changed. One man can now kills people within seconds. The 2nd amendment is outdated it was created way back where weapons had little to no accuracy and realoding was very slow now we have Assaukt rifles that can kill within seconds.

  • Problem is mental helathcare

    If you give a person in an altered mind state a gun, he will use it against others. If you give him a knife, a bow or every other weapon he will do the same. But, why instead of making him do the same act with a different weapon you (i am European) cure him for FREE? That should resolve the situation.

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