After watching a documentary on Gun Control I have decided to bring this subject over to the debate sections. How do you feel about gun control. Should be people allowed to own guns, or should we be stripped away of our second amendment, the right to bare arms. I will be debating on both sides. Doesn't mean I am on the fence I know my stance on the subject.
Well, I don't see the reason why people buy firearms other than ones used for hunting. But I don't think that is the problem with America. As Michael Moore demonstrated in Bowling for Columbine, there are other countries that give citizens the same access to weaponry as we do; however, their crime rates are lower. The reason to this is beyond me, but I don't think that taking away the second amendment will solve anything.
America has gun culture. The problem is the culture not the guns. You've got people that run campaign to legalise assault rifles, people with 7 shotties, 3 snipers and myriads of handguns. Sadly you can't just change a culture. But stricter rules certainly should be put in place. For example maybe a 2 gun limit per household, stronger guns should be hard or impossible to get. And stricter rules on licensing. Here in Australia, barely anyone has a gun. It is near impossible to obtain one, and actively use it. Overall, we have benefited from this but our crime rates aren't much better.
Yeah, I think some kind of limit would be better than a complete removal of the second amendment; that would cause an uproar. So, how can we attempt to reform our violent society?
Actually, the problem is most gun related accidents happen due to lack of knowledge. In Switzerland,(Could be Sweden.) just about everyone has a gun. The difference is that they have a required military service of 2 weeks a year which allows them to learn how to handle a gun.
I dont think they should take guns from people. It wont help anyway. If you take away everyones guns, black-thug-gangster-bitches will just beat people down in larger groups instead of shoot them to rob them. And the people you took guns from wont be able to defend themselves. Maybe before you could own a certain type of weapon you had to pay and take a 2 week class on the weapon. That will weed out all but the most determined burn out thugs. And I own alot of weapons, so dont knock on the owning lots of weapons, thank you very much.
I think that magnums, and rifles should be allowed to be kept by anyone. However, there is no use for an automatic weapon other than killing other people. I think that only cops and the army should be allowed to carry any of those. You can keep a magnum for self defense too, because if you are ever going to get into a situation where you NEED an automatic weapon, it should probably be left to the professionals.
So you are saying guns are a means of protection. If you confront a person that is robbing you, and both of you have a gun, then one of you will get shot, harmed, or killed. Guns as protection is the furthest from the truth. If that same guy were to rob you and only he had a gun. You would be more willing to give him your money/belongings. No one would get hurt, you would lose some possesions but would still be alive.
Anyone should be able to have a rifle or handgun, but you should have to have a liscense. My friend did a speech on you should be able to have guns on college campuses. So many problems with his arguements. I'll see if I can find it.
I wrote my term paper on gun control and access to guns isn't what causes gun violence the two countries with lowest gun crimes are japan where only 53 hand guns are legally owned and Switzerland where every males between the ages of 18 and 35 and most past 35 own standard issue military assault rifles and have the right to carry them where ever they want. in America there was an experiment in a Tennessee town where the mayor instated a law that every one must have a gun at their house pardoning conscientious objects and felons and assorted criminals from the law. what happened the crime rate dropped 40%. and if that is not enough watch this vid
Guns as second amendment rights were conceived by our founding fathers in response to the British confiscation of firearms in colonial America. (No source on this, learned it in History class.) Thus, it is outdated. However, taking guns from everyone, making sure not to miss any, not to mention illegal, untracked firearms... Also, target shooting with guns is perfectly fine. Hunting, not so much... It's a very tough issue that I have to say, I'm completely split on.
Many of those who founded the constitution believed that the government should fear its people, not the other way around. Guns were given to the people so the government would be held responsible if it ever became tyranic. I still believe we should have the right to bare arms. Banning weapons will only stop those who use weapons responsibly already. Guns found on the streets are almost always illegal. SO banning weapons wouldn't have the effect most think it would have. And for those who say we should have stricter gun laws, you probably aren't aware of all the gun laws which are in place. I say current gun laws need to be enforced better. That is the real issue at hand.
yes we should be allowed to bare firearms like magnums hunting rifles etc. but there is no need for anybody in the US to caryy an m16 or m4