Pro-Gun/Anti-Gun? ( Archived) (673)

Yeh but if there were no guns then no trigger will be pulled

JMO...Guns kill..People Kill

Fresh venison, love it.

Although I am pro-gun, I am going to play devils advocate.

Although I consider myself a strong supporter of the 2nd Ammendment, I understand the point of view that the ammendment itself is outdated. Yes, I know there is no expiration , but what I mean is, we have grown by leaps & bounds beyond what our founding fathers could have ever imagined as far as technology in weaponry. We can now take the head off a person at over 2000M if we buy the right weapon. Is this type of weapon truely what our founding fathers had in mind? Did they realize that one man could sit almost a mile away from a target and with the squeeze of a trigger, cripple this country by it's leaders being targeted?

Yes I understand & agree that most are responsible with their firearms, but what about those that have sinister plans or even those who are irresponsible with them. In todays world we find ourselves giving up certain concessions to the government for our security. We are subject to warrantless searches, and in this digital age, we are tracked by our social security number and the government knows everything about us. Yet , hundreds if not thousands die a year from simple firearm accidents.

We no longer live in a world where hunting in our society is our source of food. We can drive down to the grocery store and be surrounded by a wide array of well cut meat.

Then there is the criminal element. Wouldn't it be nice for the police to be able to tack on another 5-10 years prison sentence on someone that is a known criminal but the police can't build a case? Not to mention, we would not have to worry about the lone wolfs of the world that act our their aggressions in such cowardly ways as shooting unarmed civilians such as the recent shooting near Pittsburgh in which 3 people died and the Washington D.C. attack in which a security guard died. Maybe had these individuals weapons been seized, these people still today could be living in peace with their families.

I know that is the right of an American to bear arms (although this has yet to be specifically defined by the Supreme Court), however, at what cost? How many deaths at the hands of firearms will it take to be enough to say that they should not be in the hands of anyone? Will it take a member of your family being a victim of such a crime to change your opinion?

Then there is the "well criminals will get weapons regardless" argument. Well, guess where most of those firearms come from? They are stolen from the homes of irresponsible gun owners. Very rarely does a criminal go to a retail or gunshop to buy a weapon. They want nothing that can be traced back to them. If police confiscate weapons from the civilian population, then there will be nothing to steal, or any gun shops or retail outlets to buy them from.

---

Again, personally I am very pro-gun and just wanted to throw out a perspective that the anti-gun community may convey.

Very well said..

I am glad here in Canada you cant have weapons like those just laying around...

We have a well regulated militia in the National Guard. They have the same weaponry that the federal army has.

Best thing about the National Guard is, that it is manned by local residents of the community who have a vested interest in the security of their community and they have the firepower to perform their duties. Nowhere does it say that we have a right to a regulated CIVILIAN milita.

I only use my guns to kill people and to perform robberies like banks and 7/11's ....only had to shoot one little old lady once as she refused to give up her walker...hey it was a good one ,you know the one with wheels on the front legs......