Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To all those opposed to guns, and all for abolishing our 2nd amendment rights, I have a few questions:
- Do you honestly think it's a good idea for citizens not to be allowed the right to bear arms?
- Do you think that criminals who have no regard for the law to begin with are going to follow any gun restriction law?
- Don't you think that once criminals are the only people with guns that the rest of society aren't sitting ducks for home invasion, robbery and a number of other crimes by gunpoint, because the criminal will know you have absolutely no way to defend yourself?
- Do you honestly think that if guns had been outlawed that incidents like Columbine would have never happened, that they wouldn't have gone to a black market arms dealer to carry out their horrifying act?
I'm all for keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people, but I think extreme gun control policies would do much more harm than good. I personally think one should have the right to bear arms for protection of one's self and one's family. Your thoughts?
To all those opposed to guns, and all for abolishing our 2nd amendment rights, I have a few questions:
- Do you honestly think it's a good idea for citizens not to be allowed the right to bear arms?
- Do you think that criminals who have no regard for the law to begin with are going to follow any gun restriction law?
- Don't you think that once criminals are the only people with guns that the rest of society aren't sitting ducks for home invasion, robbery and a number of other crimes by gunpoint, because the criminal will know you have absolutely no way to defend yourself?
- Do you honestly think that if guns had been outlawed that incidents like Columbine would have never happened, that they wouldn't have gone to a black market arms dealer to carry out their horrifying act?
I'm all for keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people, but I think extreme gun control policies would do much more harm than good. I personally think one should have the right to bear arms for protection of one's self and one's family. Your thoughts?
Consider this:
The gun in your home- the one that makes you feel "safe"- is 22 times MORE likely to kill/injure a family member than it is to repel an intruder.
To all those opposed to guns, and all for abolishing our 2nd amendment rights, I have a few questions:
I personally think one should have the right to bear arms for protection of one's self and one's family.
It starts and end with the Second Amendment which the current U.S. Supreme Court has upheld in its ruling against Washington, DC's gun ban.
As hard as California tries to make guns and ammunition illegal, expensive and hard to o0btain it still can't close the door on all of them. In fact, I recently bought one that's not on CA's approved list through a private sale brokered by a licensed dealer.
I am the first to believe in gun safety (all mine are locked away with one being easy to access if I need to) and responsible gun ownership. I'm also a former cop and Army combat veteran. I'm comfortable with gun, know how to use them and when. My father was an avid collector so I also grew up with them and started shooting when I was about six.
I enjoy shooting as a hobby and I also feel more comfortable knowing my home and family are protected if need be. Hopefully that will never become necessary.
I'm not paranoid nor do I dwell upon it but I also don't trust government to protect us or even our Second Amendment rights; perhaps because I worked for government most of my life. I'll keep my guns, thanks.
The gun in your home- the one that makes you feel "safe"- is 22 times MORE likely to kill/injure a family member than it is to repel an intruder.
I would think that this statistic would highlight the importace to require people who want to have guns be required to get some training on how to properly use and store the gun. Not to keep people from having guns, but to have them go through the appropriate training.
I think Curmudgeon, by his explanation, is much less likely to kill/injure a family member than someone who just got a gun and has never even fired one before.
The gun in your home- the one that makes you feel "safe"- is 22 times MORE likely to kill/injure a family member than it is to repel an intruder.
All my guns are locked up, and I have them for more than "feeling safe", I enjoy hunting and target shooting as a hobby. Also, when I visit my parents in Montana, my brothers and I go into the wilderness for camping/hiking etc., and with Grizzlies, black bears, mountain lions, wolves, wolverines, etc. I would never go out there without the ability to protect myself.
I think it largely depends on where you live. In some parts of Alaska you'd be an idjit to not have a firearm. But then, it makes me ill to read about another kid killed because some parent left a loaded gun somewhere. There was one in Anchorage just the other day.
The gun in your home- the one that makes you feel "safe"- is 22 times MORE likely to kill/injure a family member than it is to repel an intruder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ramanboy33
The 2nd amendment should only apply to the arms available as of 1791.
You guys are apparently against guns, but you failed to answer any of the questions in my OP. I was looking to get answers to those particular questions.
Why are humans the only species that protects the shallow end of the gene pool?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.