And more importantly, what place does the government have deciding what type of guns we can have and who can own them? I'm interested in hearing your responses, thanks!
so you want a deagle .50 to be legal ? so 13 year old can run around with guns? The legalization of a gun is depended on past criminal violations , gun calibrate etc.. If there was no government to legalise these , it would be like having no laws.. think for a second.
The 2nd Amendment calls for a well regulated militia. So the government has every right to regulate its militia (gun control) which every 17 year old male citizen is automatically a part of. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ts_search.pl?title=10&sec=311
Any type of weaponry, or any product for that matter, should be able to be purchased by anyone. What you are recommending is the restriction of the peoples right to bear arms based on the chance that they may commit a crime with it. If someone commits a crime, arrest them; but if you remove a persons potential to commit a crime you also remove their rights and make them powerless against the state. Here is the second ammendment: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." It includes both the individuals right as well as the states right, that ruling is only for the latter.
Damn straight, do you want to ban rap music because certain individuals might have a higher chance of committing a crime if they listen to it?
ok , I'm 15 give me a gun. I've never been in trouble with the law. No wait , give me 5 guns , I'll give 2 to my friends and keep 1 in my pocket and leave the the other 3 under my bed and load them , and hope my 6 and 11 year old brother don't use them..
Can you even afford a gun? And if you owned one, would you kill someone if it wasn't in self defense? Also, leaving them laying around with kids in the vacinity is not a good choice but it is yours to make.
The more guns around = the less crimes will be commited because real criminals will not have power over the good guys. You can't and shouldn't regulate guns or stupidity.
Yes I am, why would I be joking about you wanting the federal government to decide what I can and cannot own because it's "for my own good"?
it's for the greater good of the community at large. More guns = more shootings/murders. You can't argue other wise. In a community where's there's no guns at all , there's no shootings" next you're gonna say "guns don't kill people , people kill people ?
I was just showing evidence that the more guns in circulation/available , the more shootings there will be.
and if there are more knives, more stabbings will occur. the more clubs, the more clubbing will occur. I fail to see a point.
I'm trying to tell the guy , who said "The more guns around = the less crimes will be commited because real criminals will not have power over the good guys. You can't and shouldn't regulate guns or stupidity." He;s got it wrong. More guns = more killings no the other way around.
So, in your mind, that means less guns = less killings. Is this your point? Washington DC has the tightest gun control laws in the US, yet has the most murders. New York has tight gun control laws, yet has lots of murders. Criminals get guns however they can. Gun control laws only hamper the person who obeys the rules. Criminals, oddly enough, are not contrained by the law. http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0210e.asp As I said...in the real world...less guns does not equal less crimes.
That is the most communist statement I have heard today, wow LMesh. There are only individuals and they should be able to make there own choices. More guns in the hands of criminals = more shootings, show me one shooting not in self defense that was done by someone who isn't a criminal If you show me a valid non-anecdotal study showing this then maybe I'll understand your views but regardless; you can't restrict everyones rights for "the good of the communiity".