Gun regulations

Lex · 11-08-2008, 06:28 AM

The second amendment allows citizens to carry firearms, so obviously people cared and still care a lot of this, but I personally believe that this is a fairly stupid amendment.
Maybe back in the 1700's your guns were needed, but I honestly see no point in allowing people to carry guns, especially high strength ones that kill.
With recent events like school shootings, the bad points of this amendment have been shown. And it's not just shootings, pointless deaths are happening everywhere from guns.
Some may argue you may need to use them to prevent it in situations such as a break in, but honestly, I don't see how protecting your home in a break in that will probably never happen for most people, outweighs unnecessary deaths from gun usage.

dtwgtx · 11-08-2008, 04:14 PM

Your comments are understandable, and I agree we may need to get more strict on gun control, but I for one don't think we need to disregard the 2nd amendment. "GUNS" don't kill people......People kill people. Again not saying their has never been instances of school violence, gangs, and accidental death, but I just think we need to look at the "who, what, when, why, and where's" of the situation(s) and try to keep the firearms out of wrong people's hands. As an avid hunter, I know lots of people with powerful firearms, but none of which have been used for any sort or violence. So I will ask that you keep an open mind, and realize that it may be an issue that each state, or local municipalities need to look at, but don't punish the American's who respect you and your right not to carry one. I think that America's people could come up with a compromise to let some use guns, and some not. Maybe even a criminal background check before not only ANY gun but also for ANY license that could potentially have a firearm used. Just some thoughts before we delete the 2nd amendment all together.

2008 · 11-08-2008, 09:08 PM

Well in the rural communities where people tend to care more about owning a gun, it's highly essential for them as it gives them a means of security. The police will not show up there immediately like in the busy cities, and even in such cities the police usually isn't that fast to begin with.

If someone is a potential threat your life at that point, you can't be depending on the official law enforcements, for those people they'll just whip out their gun and defend themselves from this threat. Also, usually crimes are low in these areas because the criminals know that these people can and will defend themselves. I'm not saying everyone should have a weapon though, but some should. And it should be a tedious process to get one to prevent abuse.

scout swimmer · 11-09-2008, 02:50 AM

This issue is proving to be a wildfire rallying cry for opposition to everything Obama. There is only so much political capital and nothing could be more wasteful than to use up precious capital on this issue that never will be practicably enforceable.
There will be civil war in America before many Americans will give up their guns. The only possible way to accomplish extensive gun control at a national level will be to change public opinion so much that we are able to pass modification to the constitution, which would require a supermajority. Even if you are able to stack the Supreme Court to get an adverse judgment to the 2nd amendment, without overwhelming public support you would not be able to avoid civil war. Just like in Iraq the cost in violence would be greater than the prevented violence. If you don't realize the extent of this you are getting your information from extremely filtered sources. Why give this issue a rallying capability by even suggesting that there is a plan to take precious guns away.

ZackFaire · 11-09-2008, 03:33 AM

The reason why most break-ins don't happen is because people are afraid of getting shot by a gun since the second amendment allows us to bear them.

We have every reason to be allowed to bear arms. The biggest issue is protection and we need guns in order to protect ourselves.

Gun Regulation is the answer to making sure that everyone that owns a gun is accounted for so that people will be punished for their mistakes.

Taking away people's rights to wield weapons will make them vulnerable to anyone that secretly has one.

Right · 11-09-2008, 03:38 AM

The point of "2008" is well taken.

Well...if that be the case, limit licensing the same in rural areas with stricter guidelines for monitoring the usage of the same.

I feel...guns should not have place in big cities where help is always available round the corner. It is too dangerous to provide such weapons in the name of security.

Possessing the same should be completely banned. This way, law enforcements would be very efficiently be able to control anti-social from carrying the same and with no weapons at their disposal.....there would be reduction in their illegal activities.....Just my humble opinion...

Regards,

Right

rockbottom · 11-09-2008, 04:50 AM

I think we should outlaw all rocks over 1/2 oz. That way No one would ever be stoned to death.Think of what it will mean to Muslem women of the world Rocky

Lex · 11-09-2008, 07:39 AM

Yes, definitely make it more tedious to get it, under no circumstances should a teenager be able to get their hands on one.
And any gun beyond mildly dangerous should not be allowed to be used
Sure, I could see the use of it in more rural areas, but otherwise, why would someone need one in city areas...
A lot of pointless deaths are happening from shootings.

Vivian Roberts · 11-09-2008, 04:20 PM

I live in a very rural environment filled with wild life, and some dumped by those who live in cities. I raise my own food, both animal and vegetable. My dogs are my first line of defense as they warn me of impending danger. Without a weapon I would be at the mercy of both the wildlife and the people who dump them. In the last 40 years I have needed lethal force 3 times.

11-08-2008, 06:28 AM	#1
Lex Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 65	Gun regulations The second amendment allows citizens to carry firearms, so obviously people cared and still care a lot of this, but I personally believe that this is a fairly stupid amendment. Maybe back in the 1700's your guns were needed, but I honestly see no point in allowing people to carry guns, especially high strength ones that kill. With recent events like school shootings, the bad points of this amendment have been shown. And it's not just shootings, pointless deaths are happening everywhere from guns. Some may argue you may need to use them to prevent it in situations such as a break in, but honestly, I don't see how protecting your home in a break in that will probably never happen for most people, outweighs unnecessary deaths from gun usage.

11-08-2008, 04:14 PM	#2
dtwgtx Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 1	Is it the guns or the people? Your comments are understandable, and I agree we may need to get more strict on gun control, but I for one don't think we need to disregard the 2nd amendment. "GUNS" don't kill people......People kill people. Again not saying their has never been instances of school violence, gangs, and accidental death, but I just think we need to look at the "who, what, when, why, and where's" of the situation(s) and try to keep the firearms out of wrong people's hands. As an avid hunter, I know lots of people with powerful firearms, but none of which have been used for any sort or violence. So I will ask that you keep an open mind, and realize that it may be an issue that each state, or local municipalities need to look at, but don't punish the American's who respect you and your right not to carry one. I think that America's people could come up with a compromise to let some use guns, and some not. Maybe even a criminal background check before not only ANY gun but also for ANY license that could potentially have a firearm used. Just some thoughts before we delete the 2nd amendment all together.

11-09-2008, 02:50 AM	#4
scout swimmer Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 32	This issue is proving to be a wildfire rallying cry for opposition to everything Obama. There is only so much political capital and nothing could be more wasteful than to use up precious capital on this issue that never will be practicably enforceable. There will be civil war in America before many Americans will give up their guns. The only possible way to accomplish extensive gun control at a national level will be to change public opinion so much that we are able to pass modification to the constitution, which would require a supermajority. Even if you are able to stack the Supreme Court to get an adverse judgment to the 2nd amendment, without overwhelming public support you would not be able to avoid civil war. Just like in Iraq the cost in violence would be greater than the prevented violence. If you don't realize the extent of this you are getting your information from extremely filtered sources. Why give this issue a rallying capability by even suggesting that there is a plan to take precious guns away. Last edited by scout swimmer; 11-09-2008 at 11:49 AM.

11-09-2008, 04:50 AM	#7
rockbottom Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Arkansas Posts: 1	I think we should outlaw all rocks over 1/2 oz. That way No one would ever be stoned to death.Think of what it will mean to Muslem women of the world Rocky Last edited by rockbottom; 11-09-2008 at 04:51 AM. Reason: Sp

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

11-08-2008, 09:08 PM	#3
2008 Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 51	Well in the rural communities where people tend to care more about owning a gun, it's highly essential for them as it gives them a means of security. The police will not show up there immediately like in the busy cities, and even in such cities the police usually isn't that fast to begin with. If someone is a potential threat your life at that point, you can't be depending on the official law enforcements, for those people they'll just whip out their gun and defend themselves from this threat. Also, usually crimes are low in these areas because the criminals know that these people can and will defend themselves. I'm not saying everyone should have a weapon though, but some should. And it should be a tedious process to get one to prevent abuse.

11-09-2008, 03:33 AM	#5
ZackFaire Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 20	The reason why most break-ins don't happen is because people are afraid of getting shot by a gun since the second amendment allows us to bear them. We have every reason to be allowed to bear arms. The biggest issue is protection and we need guns in order to protect ourselves. Gun Regulation is the answer to making sure that everyone that owns a gun is accounted for so that people will be punished for their mistakes. Taking away people's rights to wield weapons will make them vulnerable to anyone that secretly has one.

11-09-2008, 03:38 AM	#6
Right Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 39	The point of "2008" is well taken. Well...if that be the case, limit licensing the same in rural areas with stricter guidelines for monitoring the usage of the same. I feel...guns should not have place in big cities where help is always available round the corner. It is too dangerous to provide such weapons in the name of security. Possessing the same should be completely banned. This way, law enforcements would be very efficiently be able to control anti-social from carrying the same and with no weapons at their disposal.....there would be reduction in their illegal activities.....Just my humble opinion... Regards, Right

11-09-2008, 07:39 AM	#8
Lex Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 65	Yes, definitely make it more tedious to get it, under no circumstances should a teenager be able to get their hands on one. And any gun beyond mildly dangerous should not be allowed to be used Sure, I could see the use of it in more rural areas, but otherwise, why would someone need one in city areas... A lot of pointless deaths are happening from shootings.

11-09-2008, 04:20 PM	#9
Vivian Roberts Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: High Desert Southern California Posts: 2	I live in a very rural environment filled with wild life, and some dumped by those who live in cities. I raise my own food, both animal and vegetable. My dogs are my first line of defense as they warn me of impending danger. Without a weapon I would be at the mercy of both the wildlife and the people who dump them. In the last 40 years I have needed lethal force 3 times.