rosieb (05-15-2014)
Ok I'm Australian so guns aren't as easy to get a hold of here legally without the government up your asshole about it with the restrictions so strong.
I've always thought this was a bad idea like if my country got invaded we would be fucked probably since out army isn't that big compared to other regions.
Only good thing is that less crime maybe?!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
rosieb (05-15-2014)
Well at least for me, a silly American, I think it's best that guns be available with restrictions. Americans have a tendency to be untrustworthy and stupid, I've found, when they are crazy about gun rights. I don't trust a redneck with a weapon that can easily kill a man.
Of course, the black market makes it easy for anyone to get a gun so... it's a moot point because there's so many guns everywhere that it cannot be controlled.
Guns, within reason. If someone wants to have a gun in their house in case it gets broken in to & they feel like they need to protect their property and families, sure. But I don't think that high capacity guns are a good idea. I also think that there needs to be more intense background checks that you need to go through every so often. I mean, I had to retake the written exam to get my driver's license renewed. People should be required to go through gun safety training (and honestly psychological tests) every so often to retain their gun license.
I get it's in the Constitution and everything, but I think it needs to be taken in context of the time it's written.
You agree to go through mandatory retesting for driver's licenses, why shouldn't there be an equal requirement for gun ownership?
Oh, but high capacity guns in case of zombies. Yep.
I know this guy with a garage full of guns. It scares the shit out of me.
Civilians can apply for a license to own low-caliber weapons, I think. The ones that probably won't kill someone unless you're a great shot. Sure, self-defense is great, but why do you have to kill the guy? I'm sure getting shot hurts like hell even if it's not fatal. It kind of gets the point across without unnecessary death and lets the crime get dealt with. This then avoids people accidentally killing and such. Death is kind of irreversible. Also I agree about tests. Police have to pass marksmanship tests or w/e to continue carrying and working. If you wanna own a gun, you should do the same.
If people want to go hunting, they can apply to rent shotguns and such for a set time and/or location. Those are not things you need to have in a home, imo.
Military is another story. Whatever works, man.
So, yes, right to bear arms...with restrictions.
People as a whole are too dumb to be trusted with these things.
Nations with stringent anti-gun laws generally have substantially higher murder rates than those that do not. The study found that the nine European nations with the lowest rates of gun ownership have a combined murder rate three times higher than that of the nine nations with the highest rates of gun ownership.
In American history there have been many court battles trying to reach a definitive conclusion about the Second Amendment and it's application. There have been several guns that have been made illegal because judges have felt that they are not necessary weapons for militias to use to protect themselves and their states, such as sawed-off shot guns. More recently there has also been bans on automatic weapons, assault rifles and high capacity magazines, although the Constitution never had any mention of banning any weapons. Congress has placed greater limitations on the receipt, possession, and transportation of firearms, and proposals for national registration or prohibition of firearms altogether have been made (Cornell University Law School). The question is now centered more on the fact that we do not know at what point government regulation and outright banning of certain weapons directly violates the Second Amendment right of citizens.
Further, one court case about the boundaries of the Second Amendment resulted in a more clear definition of the phrase, ‘keep and bear Arms’ by admitting that at first the phrase was used in specific relation to military activities. However, the Court also clearly stated that this was not the only legal application of the phrase. It was concluded that it could be applied to individuals who are not a part of a militias as well. With that interpretation of the Second Amendment, it’s clear that not only should people be able to own weapons and carry them, it’s actually their right. Obviously, felons are not permitted to legally own a gun, but that law itself is also up for legal interpretation. Some non-violent felons do receive the right to bear arms after serving their sentence.
Due to the fact that so much of gun ownership rights fall into the area of state law, not federal law, there are many areas in the country that have more people owning guns than others. This itself is an example of legal segregation of the population, for example, it’s much easier to own a weapon in the south and the west than the northeast like New York City. Here in New York City, it’s nearly impossible to get a concealed carry permit unless you are someone who deals with a lot of money, or a police officer or immediate family member.
So yeah, I firmly believe that any citizen who does not have a criminal record (or mental health issue, but that's a given, and even so - needs to be evaluated as most mentally ill people wouldn't bother to shoot people up, they are just media scapegoats) has the right to bare arms, including a concealed weapon. The right to own a gun in America is about far more than simply owning a gun to protect yourself, your property, or to go hunting....and based off how well the unregulated European countries do with gun ownership, seems to be a good idea for the world.
Criminals will always have weapons, decent people should be able to protect themselves with equal force. Look at China, no guns, people get hacked to death...people are going to kill regardless.
"but I ain't got time for time...dancing in the shadows of the shadows, no time to shine..."
Naked Gamer(05-15-2014)
I would like to have a gun only for the soul purpose of protecting my house incase of brake in and also Zombies just incase there not much other reasons unless your a officer of the law etc but even then with Electric weapon tech these days bullet weapons here in Aus are fading!! cops here can't really use real gun anymore it's all for show really.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Assuming the cops didn't have guns here, I'd be more inclined to be okay with the people not having them (though the military, CIA, FBI, etc..still would - so eh...Martial Law is no bueno)...but the fact of the matter is...shit will go down in the U.S one day, we are not above the rest of the world...and people without a means to fight back are simply sitting ducks. Not for me, no way, no how.
"but I ain't got time for time...dancing in the shadows of the shadows, no time to shine..."
Above in the sense of technology, maybe, but not above turning batshit on the people. Everyone here thinks shit only goes down in other countries, as if we are better. The government is really gonna stick it to people one day, and those who have blindly followed are gonna end up in FEMA camps or some shit. I'll stick with my guns (:
"but I ain't got time for time...dancing in the shadows of the shadows, no time to shine..."
Jager (06-03-2014),Naked Gamer(05-15-2014)