This debate has gone on for years and probably will never be satisfied to everybody`s expectations. What do you believe?. Should all guns be banned or do you believe that your rights supercede the rights of innocents to live.
I am new here, but have seen this subject raised before.My immediate reaction would be to say "ban all guns",but as i dont live in the U.S.A, and i am not part of that culture,i think it would be wrong for me to make such a sweeping statement. Even if that is the way it went, i would imagine the logistics of retrieving every gun "out there" would be a nightmare. If i lived there,in an area where there was serious crime,i would proberly find myself buying a firearm for protection,although it is something i would not want to do.
Waterbearer63: This debate has gone on for years and probably will never be satisfied to everybody`s expectations. What do you believe?. Should all guns be banned or do you believe that your rights supercede the rights of innocents to live.
How do you repeal a RIGHT?
And,of course,every Criminal will gladly turn in his Firearm-Collection!
Waterbearer63: This debate has gone on for years and probably will never be satisfied to everybody`s expectations. What do you believe?. Should all guns be banned or do you believe that your rights supercede the rights of innocents to live.
Waterbearer63: This debate has gone on for years and probably will never be satisfied to everybody`s expectations. What do you believe?. Should all guns be banned or do you believe that your rights supercede the rights of innocents to live.
Uh,...I own many firearms,....how does this relate to my rights to own and bear such instruments supercede the rights of innocents to live, for as an "innocent" can I supercede my own rights???? Are you stating that as an owner of a firearm(s) I am pre-disposed to acts of violence? May I introduce you to my collection of kitchen knives,...and baseball bats, and....well,...you may see where I am going with this,....and as a fellow Albertan I am truly amazed you raised this question,....after the 2 billion dollar GR nonsense,....
Waterbearer63: This debate has gone on for years and probably will never be satisfied to everybody`s expectations. What do you believe?. Should all guns be banned or do you believe that your rights supercede the rights of innocents to live.
I support the right that every mentally stable citizen without a criminal record and over 18 should have the right to bare arms . There should be some regulation about drinking, use of drugs and some medications
Boban1: I support the right that every mentally stable citizen without a criminal record and over 18 should have the right to bare arms . There should be some regulation about drinking, use of drugs and some medications
Boban1: I support the right that every mentally stable citizen without a criminal record and over 18 should have the right to bare arms . There should be some regulation about drinking, use of drugs and some medications
Waterbearer63: This debate has gone on for years and probably will never be satisfied to everybody`s expectations. What do you believe?. Should all guns be banned or do you believe that your rights supercede the rights of innocents to live.
The biggest difference between those who support the 2nd amendment and those who don't is that those who support it would never try to make those who don't buy or keep weapons. In contrast, those who don't like weapons want to invoke their values on those that do by "banning" certain aspects. It's rather stupid for an unarmed anti gun advocate to screw with an armed persons weapons or any of their rights provided under the constitution. I believe our forefathers knew this which is why we have the 2nd amendment and why the NRA or any of its members will never allow anyone to screw with our right to own weapons.
Waterbearer63: It`s every Americans right to bear arms. Do you think this law should be repealed or not?
It's not just a law. It's an article of the Bill of Rights, the most important part of the US constitution. Without which the people would not have accepted the constitution at all.
It's not about hunting. It's about having the means to fight back against tyranny. And tyranny loves the idea of disarming the people.
"Congress is empowered to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, & repel invasions."
SparkyAgain: The biggest difference between those who support the 2nd amendment and those who don't is that those who support it would never try to make those who don't buy or keep weapons. In contrast, those who don't like weapons want to invoke their values on those that do by "banning" certain aspects. It's rather stupid for an unarmed anti gun advocate to screw with an armed persons weapons or any of their rights provided under the constitution. I believe our forefathers knew this which is why we have the 2nd amendment and why the NRA or any of its members will never allow anyone to screw with our right to own weapons.
I have never understood this debate. My Grandfather made guns from in his shop when I was a boy. I used to go in there and watch. The topic is easy. I made my first working gun from old engine parts and scrap steel there in his shop when I was 12. Okay, it was only a 2 shot pistol, but the blowback principle was understood and I suppose if I had wanted to I could have copied something he had. My point is, Pandora's box was opened centuries ago.
If you banned them all today, it would a) take 200+ years to collect them all (there are many guns more than 100 years old that still work perfectly), and, b) people would start making new ones by the second day. The only thing such a law would do is create a very dangerous totally false impression that there are no more guns so you are safe. Meanwhile the guy at your front door has one.
Ken_19: I have never understood this debate. My Grandfather made guns from in his shop when I was a boy. I used to go in there and watch. The topic is easy. I made my first working gun from old engine parts and scrap steel there in his shop when I was 12. Okay, it was only a 2 shot pistol, but the blowback principle was understood and I suppose if I had wanted to I could have copied something he had. My point is, Pandora's box was opened centuries ago.
If you banned them all today, it would a) take 200+ years to collect them all (there are many guns more than 100 years old that still work perfectly), and, b) people would start making new ones by the second day. The only thing such a law would do is create a very dangerous totally false impression that there are no more guns so you are safe. Meanwhile the guy at your front door has one.
Seventy-two killed resisting gun confiscation in Boston
BOSTON National guard units seeking to confiscate a cache of recently banned assault weapons were ambus...hed on April 19th by elements of a Para-military extremist faction. Military and law enforcement sources estimate that 72 were killed and more than 200 injured before government forces were compelled to withdraw.
Speaking after the clash, Massachusetts Governor Thomas Gage declared that the extremist faction, which was made up of local citizens, has links to the radical right-wing tax protest movement. Gage blamed the extremists for recent incidents of vandalism directed against internal revenue offices. The governor, who described the group's organizers as "criminals," issued an executive order authorizing the summary arrest of any individual who has interfered with the government's efforts to secure law and order. The military raid on the extremist arsenal followed wide-spread refusal by the local citizenry to turn over recently outlawed assault weapons.
Gage issued a ban on military-style assault weapons and ammunition earlier in the week. This decision followed a meeting in early this month between government and military leaders at which the governor authorized the forcible confiscation of illegal arms.
One government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, pointed out that "none of these people would have been killed had the extremists obeyed the law and turned over their weapons voluntarily." Government troops initially succeeded in confiscating a large supply of outlawed weapons and ammunition. However, troops attempting to seize arms and ammunition in Lexington met with resistance from heavily-armed extremists who had been tipped off regarding the government's plans. During a tense standoff in Lexington 's town park, National Guard Colonel Francis Smith, commander of the government operation, ordered the armed group to surrender and return to their homes. The impasse was broken by a single shot, which was reportedly fired by one of the right-wing extremists. Eight civilians were killed in the ensuing exchange.
Ironically, the local citizenry blamed government forces rather than the extremists for the civilian deaths. Before order could be restored, armed citizens from surrounding areas had descended upon the guard units.
Colonel Smith, finding his forces over matched by the armed mob, ordered a retreat.
Governor Gage has called upon citizens to support the state/national joint task force in its effort to restore law and order. The governor also demanded the surrender of those responsible for planning and leading the attack against the government troops. Samuel Adams, Paul Revere, and John Hancock, who have been identified as "ringleaders" of the extremist faction, remain at large.
. . . And this, people, is how the American Revolution began .
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
It`s every Americans right to bear arms. Do you think this law should be repealed or not?.(Vote Below)