Gun Control

[musicmonster]

I want to know what is everybody's stand here on gun control? I saw some people who don't want to own it while others are suggesting people should have one. I myself would prefer to have at least one for self-defense reasons and of course for emergency only. What is your stand?

 

[Scorpion]

Self-defense if you are traveling yes as you never know what pops up to you. But within the city, I don't think its necessary to carry a gun.

 

[CivilDefense]

I am a strong supporter of our right to keep and bear arms; for self-defense, hunting, and recreational shooting (e.g., skeet, targets, etc.). It is fundamental right codified in our Constitution. It has also done well for our defense in this country, both from the threat of foreign invasion, but also self-defense in the wake of a natural disaster. That is not to say, of course, that reasonable measures to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, mentally deranged individuals, and those underage shouldn't be in place. Laws and regulations that accomplish that are all well and good. All freedoms come with responsibilities and gun owners must operate and store their arms in a safe and sane manner at all times.

 

[musicmonster]

I am a strong supporter of our right to keep and bear arms; for self-defense, hunting, and recreational shooting (e.g., skeet, targets, etc.). It is fundamental right codified in our Constitution. It has also done well for our defense in this country, both from the threat of foreign invasion, but also self-defense in the wake of a natural disaster. That is not to say, of course, that reasonable measures to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, mentally deranged individuals, and those underage shouldn't be in place. Laws and regulations that accomplish that are all well and good. All freedoms come with responsibilities and gun owners must operate and store their arms in a safe and sane manner at all times.

I'm with you in this my brother. It is all about proper handling and knowing one's responsibilities in handling it.

 

[stryker]

Actually, I'm rarely in an extremely urban environment so any opinion I might have of owning a gun for protection under circumstances which might be met in an inner city or the like would be null and void concerning myself. I am, however, frequently out and about in sparsely populated areas both in and around national forest lands.
Sometimes I'm alone and sometimes not. Either way, I like having a gun on me. One just never knows what one could run up on.
I will admit, though, that at one time my interest in owning a gun of my own was very limited. Just kind of, OK. Alright. So it might be a good idea to have one on me seeing I'm often alone in a place where there is no one else to call upon in a bad situation.
But since the government has shown so much interest in pecking away at our right to own and bear arms, I've become a lot more interested; as, I'm convinced, when a government starts looking in that direction it is likely up to no good.

 

[Muthoni]

I have read so many stories of the harm that guns have caused in the hands of the wrong people. I think that citizens should not own guns. I come from a region where being in position of a gun is a great crime. Thugs still manage to buy and get guns into our nation with all entry points monitored by trained security personnel. I must admit that we are losing on this war about guns.

 

[stryker]

I have read so many stories of the harm that guns have caused in the hands of the wrong people. I think that citizens should not own guns. I come from a region where being in position of a gun is a great crime. Thugs still manage to buy and get guns into our nation with all entry points monitored by trained security personnel. I must admit that we are losing on this war about guns.

That's a large part of the problem with gun control. Bad guys don't obey laws and they love that the good guys do.

 

[Mackmax]

I support gun control. I hate when people think that gun control automatically means that they can't have guns. Nobody is banning guns, we just want to control and regulate them so that they don't get into the wrong hands.
First, I'd like to destroy the gun black market. Many criminals obtain their guns illegally, so if we could eliminate this, this would force people to register for gun-ownership, which is great. Second, we should definitely make it more difficult to own guns. The easy access to guns that criminals have is a huge issue, Why are mentally ill people very able to obtain such a dangerous weapon? We should also mandate the guns that people can have, and where they can have them. Sorry, but you don't need an AK-47 to defend your home. I just read a story about a little boy who accidentally shot his brother with a gun that their parents left lying around the house. No, you cannot bring your AK-47 to public places such as grocery stores.
In history class, I learned that the purpose of allowing the people to have guns is so that they could form militias and to go hunting since that was often the only food that they had. This doesn't apply to today, really.

 

[CivilDefense]

That's a large part of the problem with gun control. Bad guys don't obey laws and they love that the good guys do.

Bingo. For example, the bad guys in Paris were armed with AK-47s, Skorpion machine-pistols, a shotgun, handguns, and a rocket launcher. Did all the hyper restrictive gun laws in France stop them? Of course not, they are bad guys and by definition they don't obey the law.

 

[Bread]

Gun control is unneeded and inefficient. The only people that are being stopped by this law are civilians who plan on doing nothing wrong. Bad guys? are you kidding me? they will get those guns one way or another and they will use them however they see fit. A civilian should have at least one gun in their home, cause you never know when you're gonna need it.

 

[Kamarsun1]

I want to know what is everybody's stand here on gun control? I saw some people who don't want to own it while others are suggesting people should have one. I myself would prefer to have at least one for self-defense reasons and of course for emergency only. What is your stand?

I don't think most people are responsible enough to carry weapons, but I do think we should have the right to carry, mainly against the corrupt public servants. You can't even trust the ones that are supposed to protect you.

 

[gmckee1985]

I oppose any additional restrictions to limit fire arm use. We have plenty of laws now and those dont seem to work at all. The criminal element is always going to be able to get their hands on weapons and use them for nefarious purposes. Doesnt matter what laws you put into place. Its counter productive.

 

[CanisLupas]

Really an American only issue -at least in the free world. Many have said, it is perhaps not so strange that the country with the most liberal firearms laws manages to also have the most gun deaths per head of capita. What is strange is the blatant blinkered respnoce to the obvious (I see no ships! says Nelson, holding the telescope to his blind eye). Ignoring all the sentiment out there, the truth is in the figures. The fact that state laws differ is strange - gun ownership and laws relating to purchasing and carrying should not change from area to area in the same country - it creates actual in0country gun smuggling. There is real need for laws with respect to firearms to be made federal and not state - and consistent.

Knock-off Filipino guns are now routinely smuggled from the US into South America and the hands of drug cartels - it is nuts that the world's most developed country is a conduit of illegal arms into the third world!

 

[musicmonster]

I don't think most people are responsible enough to carry weapons, but I do think we should have the right to carry, mainly against the corrupt public servants. You can't even trust the ones that are supposed to protect you.

But we can always educate people and give license only those who have finished proper training. If they violate, then just give justice accordingly to what they have violated. Guns are not so different with other weapons. A simple could turn into a real killing device as well, if you know what I mean.

 

[CanisLupas]

But we can always educate people and give license only those who have finished proper training. If they violate, then just give justice accordingly to what they have violated. Guns are not so different with other weapons. A simple [Tool?] could turn into a real killing device as well, if you know what I mean.

Sure someone could kill you with a hammer - but a gun has a specific design purpose to kill (whether an animal, a person or a paper target). Even if the only people allowed to own guns were the most obedient, safe, secure and mentally stable in the world - there is still the problem of proliferation; that is, the fact that they are there means unscrupulous people will get access to them.

If a criminal expects you may be armed, then he will avoid your house - unless he thinks this of all the houses, then he arms himself and gets in the shots first - this is why home invasion has become so very violent in the States. Guns exacerbate the situation and increase the likelihood of death being the outcome. That is fact.

However, that is all semantics now. The genie cannot be forced back into the bottle. The (US) population is armed including the bad guys - forcing the giving up of arms will only leave the bad guys with, and they will likely keep the ultra-violent mentality too. Guns are here to stay.

They should be looking to limit the availability of military type weapons instead, and using technology like smart guns, to limit the effects of ownership. A trigger than can only be pulled by the registered owner will stop kids killing each other in play, theft of weapons and guns being used on their owners. This is where the money needs to be spent -and on stopping the illegal knock-off importation business as it is unsafe and goes to pay for terrorism.