• Yes, the US needs to get with the time.

  • No, we have a right to carry guns in public if we please. We don't care if we're the laughing stock of developed countries.

24% 8 votes
76% 25 votes
  • On a side note...racism doesn't go well with it.

    Posted by: reece
  • I would like to change the second amendment. It would not end-up in outlawing all guns, that would not be the purpose (not to me anyway), it would be an effort to implement normal gun control laws without the constraint of the 2nd.

    Posted by: TBR
  • Most likely modified. While it was meant to be helpful back then, it is now anothe example of something completely out of context.

    Posted by: Ezk
  • I wouldn't say to ban all gun ownership, but placing limitations on what you can do with your guns... such as not being allowed to open carry... would be really smart.

  • Guns should be replaced with tasers. We should have the right to defend ourselves, but tasers will be a more safer option.

    Posted by: Najs
  • For biased polls, I give you exhibit A. Screenshotted. Expect this to get trotted out every time you complain about censorship.

  • I PREFER having other Countries fear attacking mainland US. I Prefer being able to defend myself.

  • The thing about the rest of the developed world is that they are more moral than us. We have more incarcerated criminals than any other developed country. So if you are worried about being a laughing stock, we already have that covered. I personally would like to defend myself against those criminals that aren't incarcerated. I don't think a kitchen knife at home could do a lot against someone with an illegally obtained firearm.

  • Well, taking away the right to bear arms means more than not allowing humans to have guns. It means that as a people, when can not form a militia in order to counter a revolt by the government onto the American population, and we have no right to defend ourselves. This is a huge problem that the democratic party is advocating. Sure guns can be used in violent and inappropriate ways! This is not the only purpose of the 2nd amendment. To abolish it would be an attack on human rights and environmental safety.

  • Is anyone else getting tired of all these "should guns be legal" kind of polls? They all end with the same people giving the same answers using the same arguments.

  • Bias poll. The 2nd amendment is right to bear arms for a well regulated militia if you have read it. Meaning the National Guard. So yes. Im ok with that. Not some random unregulated un background checked guys personal stockpile.

    Posted by: Stefy
  • No, guns ensure liberty and freedom. The US has never just gone along with what Europe has done, if Europe wants to be totalitarian, that is for them to decide.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
reece says2015-06-05T23:13:15.5308104-05:00
That's an airport if anybody is wondering.
PetersSmith says2015-06-05T23:46:11.4719819-05:00
Since when does supporting the second amendment mean you support open carry?
reece says2015-06-05T23:51:24.3600255-05:00
@PetersSmith Does this poll only address open carry?
Mister_Man says2015-06-05T23:56:28.4098725-05:00
Peters - probably because the only people boasting about the 2nd amendment are the ones who are open carrying.
Varrack says2015-06-05T23:57:22.1663963-05:00
This is all wrong. The Second Amendment doesn't necessarily support open carry. It just gives the right to bear arms, which isn't extinguished by concealed carrying.
PetersSmith says2015-06-05T23:58:05.8359163-05:00
Mister_Man: Removing the second amendment would mean no one would be able to own guns anymore, even privately in their homes.
Mister_Man says2015-06-06T00:01:34.5657600-05:00
Yeah you're right... Okay then I'd say it's more reasonable to change it, so you can own guns but you can't open carry.
reece says2015-06-06T00:22:17.5040622-05:00
@PetersSmith No, the second amendment is about the right to have weapons for defense purposes. Hunting is excluded.
reece says2015-06-06T00:43:34.1858133-05:00
@Forthelulz Wait, can you take it again. ┌∩┐(◣_◢)┌∩┐... Ready.
Forthelulz says2015-06-06T00:44:21.4235217-05:00
It'll be before/after, but done.
reece says2015-06-06T00:45:56.2179605-05:00
@Forthelulz when ever you take picture of me could you tell me first?
Forthelulz says2015-06-06T00:56:53.8827177-05:00
No. I'm taking a picture of DDO intellectual property. I will tell you as a courtesy, though.
reece says2015-06-06T01:01:05.8947762-05:00
Hey, i'm not intellectual property.
OpinionPersom121 says2015-06-06T01:43:52.7681382-05:00
I find the pictures and the captions to be biased and I do disagree with this poll
Forthelulz says2015-06-06T01:45:51.6580245-05:00
What you put on the site is intellectual property. Under "Proprietary Rights in Content on Debate.Org: "All material you post on Debate.Org, including debate arguments, comments, forums, profiles, pictures, and messages becomes the property of Debate.Org, and you waive all claims of ownership for said property."
tajshar2k says2015-06-06T06:18:13.1715349-05:00
Open Carry isn't the same as CCW. I personally think open carry is stupid.
triangle.128k says2015-06-06T06:52:19.7703448-05:00
Biased poll
joetheripper117 says2015-06-06T07:39:59.4841997-05:00
I support the second amendment, but I think that open carry is stupid. You can lose open carry without losing the entire thing.
reece says2015-06-06T07:58:53.4256833-05:00
@Forthelulz Well i think those screenshots aren't that interesting. You should focus on debates and that where great arguments are actually taking place. I think DDO would be more interested in that.
Texas14 says2015-06-06T08:09:22.7164459-05:00
Our rights do not change with time. Our right to bear arms will never expire.
TBR says2015-06-06T09:10:46.8039559-05:00
PetersSmith - Repelling / changing the 2nd amendment would NOT outlaw all gun ownership. Not for hunting, or for protection. It would only remove the constitutional basis.
Joshua.Downing17 says2015-06-06T11:24:37.3093222-05:00
I don't support the abolishment of the second amendment, but the open carry policy should be made reformed or made null. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡ °)
TBR says2015-06-06T11:55:39.1427260-05:00
There are only a handful of countries that have gun rights in their constitutions, few of them are places I would care to live. Where we need to be is moving from a insane gun culture to a sane. Everyone, all gun owners, I don't see outlawing guns as rational, but I see NO rationality in how we perceive them right now. We don't need to pack heat like its the 18 century.
Renegader says2015-06-06T12:05:52.2454156-05:00
How about we can pack as much heat as we want, as long as we don't bring this heat openly into the public.
TBR says2015-06-06T12:09:05.4753715-05:00
The problem I have is with perception that you NEED to pack heat. The perception that doing so is rational.
TBR says2015-06-06T12:12:45.8998249-05:00
Not once, but a number of times I have asked gun-carrying people if they have needed to use their guns. Not once, but every time I have gotten a 'yes - I would be dead if I didn't have my gun when....'. That seems insane to me. I have never carried, most friends and family have never carried, and not ONCE have any of us said, 'sure wish I had a gun when....'
Renegader says2015-06-06T12:13:00.7222051-05:00
No one is saying anyone NEEDS to, that is my point. If you do not want to, do not buy any guns. Some people enjoy owning many weapons, and we cannot infringe on their rights as long as they do not threaten people in public view.
Renegader says2015-06-06T12:18:19.4576854-05:00
There are many cases where concealed carry owners have prevented themselves from being beaten or whatnot. It says something about our society favoring the strong and young that we would prevent someone weaker from being more safe when they walk home at night. Most gun owners have nothing to do with criminal activity too. The anti-gun crowd seems very suspicious in motive to me.
TBR says2015-06-06T12:24:10.4800357-05:00
Suspicious? How? My point is we are diluting ourselves. We imagine this terrifying society, when in reality it is quite safe.
reece says2015-06-06T12:27:42.6396279-05:00
@TBR conservatives run on fear.
Renegader says2015-06-06T12:29:34.3182922-05:00
43 dead in Baltimore in May alone. I see no reason to consider us a safe society.
TBR says2015-06-06T12:43:41.2934297-05:00
Of the 43 dead. What were the number who were not engaged in dangerous activities? Of the same 43, how many had guns themselves?
TBR says2015-06-06T12:45:13.7611291-05:00
Our society is very safe. Safer now than it has ever been. Total nonsense to walk around in a state of constant fear.
Renegader says2015-06-06T13:08:22.2148990-05:00
Regardless, given the number of firearms in the United States, do you not think criminals could still acquire them through illegal means, because you seem to be implying that gun laws would prevent these criminals.
TBR says2015-06-06T13:13:00.4191796-05:00
I am not implying that at all. However, lower legal availability would result in less guns on the black market.
TBR says2015-06-06T13:17:17.2720339-05:00
Look at it this way. With the INSANE 9 guns to 10 citizens that we have now, I am not inclined to get a gun for myself. There is no rational basis for me arming myself as I walk the streets in my mostly safe society.
Renegader says2015-06-06T14:11:21.5945086-05:00
Some people do not have that same luxury of living in an environment like that, and they are better off feeling safe.
Forthelulz says2015-06-06T14:12:50.9737882-05:00
I am very pro open carry. If a few private citizens are armed, and Good Samaritan laws allow them to help other private citizens, then violent crime will nosedive.
TBR says2015-06-06T16:13:02.6585000-05:00
I have lived in Chicago, Denver, Central Coast CA. It is still a myth that you need a gun. Get real!
Varrack says2015-06-06T16:14:51.7376028-05:00
You need to do better than anecdotal evidence TBR.
TBR says2015-06-06T16:20:51.7907216-05:00
How is my experience not valid, but gun-supporters are?

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.