I Am For The Right To Bear Arms

I Am For The Right To Bear Arms

I'm for gun rights. I believe that attacking people on the other side of the issue is not the way to solve our problems. I really think it is impossible for the two opposite sides can or would get together to solve this problem. This country is too polarizing at this point of time.

1) Background checks are at their all time high and not enough FBI agents around to do them properly.

2) Most of the gun laws on the books are not being enforced.

3) I live out in the country where I should be allowed to hunt and practice my marksmanship skills.

4) I should have the right to defend and protect my family since the local sheriff is 25 miles away and would take 30 minutes to get to my place of residence.

5) I rest my case.

6) Let me know what you think…

MasterofYou is a GirlsAskGuys Editor
Who are Editors?

Most Helpful Girl

  • Stay Locked and Loaded, @MasterofYou and Always Remember to Keep your Bible even Closer in these Hard times and More in Store.
    Good luck and Great question. xx


Most Helpful Guy

  • I agree with everything you said. Where I live, on a normal Sunday there's 3 deputies on patrol for my entire county of 50,000 people and it's bigger than some eastern states. Many states like Idaho (where I live) Montana, Wyoming, Alaska, Arizona, many more have passed laws that say any gun made in that state and is sold to a resident is not subject to federal law. That also includes silencers which tens of thousands have been made already. Wyoming, has the best law yet. It says any federal agent that enforces a federal gun law in Wyoming, the sheriff can arrest. They are subject to a $20,000 fine and up to 2 years in prison. It hasn't been tried yet but we will see what happens. If they try to force things down our throat, a group of states can get together and leave the u. s. and make our own country. This is quite popular in many western states. Our governor has even talked to people about it too get the feelings of how people around the state feel. The u. s. is definitely trending (all but maybe 8 states or so) toward more and more pro-gun laws. Idaho just joined several other states 2 weeks ago and made it legal to carry concealed with no permit. They still offer the permit so it's legal to carry in 32 other states that recognize Idaho's cwp and to avoid the background checks when buying a gun. Most people don't understand gun laws at all, not even a tiny bit. I'll die fighting for our right to keep and bear arms and take as many of the enemies of that as I can.

    • Well I live in the Nanny State of New York... We do not have Pro-gun laws here I fight hard to keep any rights I have I do have Being a Vietnam vet in the Navy during operations was part of the landing party aboard ship carried BARs and Springfield M1911 45cal sidearms... We did not have Navy Seals back then... I will always fight for mine and everyone else's right to bear arms...

    • I agree I'll fight too. There's some things that are worth fighting for that are far more important than one person's life or feelings. The right to protect yourself and your family from harm or an over reaching government is a very basic if human rights. The second amendment is the glue that holds the rest of our God given rights guaranteed by the Constitution together. Without it, there's nothing stopping them from total annihilation of basic freedoms everyone in the U. S. enjoys on a daily basis. If the second amendment went away, it doesn't mean we would lose other rights overnight but there's nothing to guarantee that and we would lose them over time. Taking basic freedoms away from people is the one thing every government has in common from the earliest to latest. I will happen here to if we let it. Just cuz we're America with Americans doesn't make us exempt from that, it will happen even if it takes 100 years. The second amendment is there to be the plan B... continuing

    • The plan A is the freedom to petition (including voting) redress (tell) the government of our grievances, the freedom to assemble (gather in protest), the freedom on the press (to write, or now broadcast) what the press wants to without censorship, etc. Some of these rights have been very eroded but we as a nation have not decided to fall back to plan B... yet. Hopefully, we will not have to.

Join the discussion

What Girls Said 3

  • I am for all constitutional rights actually. I am probably one of the few women on this site who is an avid shooter and is licensed to carry a concealed weapon, which I do on a regular basis.

    • Good for you... Now if you lived in New York (nanny state),, I would have asked you how did you handle that... But just because you have the right under the 2nd amendment dosent mean that things may change... They , the progressives, still want to take your rights away from you.. Be vigilant... Thank you for your support...

    • Progressivism seeks to dismantle the concept of natural rights, which our nation was founded upon. Natural rights are endowed by our creator and not a government or document, thus they cannot ever be taken from us. They are absolute. Progressives want rights to be granted by the government and those rights modified to fit whatever societal view exists in a particular time period. Progressives are a threat to all freedoms.

    • Marry me!

  • I was sitting on the fence with this issue but the way you have set out your point I get why you are for being able to carry a gun. I would now say that I am for bearing arms.

    • That is something coming from a woman... And coming from a place where you have no rights to gun ownership even if you wanted to... Thank you

  • Sounds good to me.


What Guys Said 5

  • I agree with your opening paragraph that positions are polarised and that having confrontational arguments doesn't help. I would favour sit down discussions between both sides to explore is there any common ground that could be discovered and implemented. If I was American, I would probably favour tighter controls (without actually infringing on the notion of gun ownership per se ) but that doesn't mean I want to take the guns of people, it is more the idea that the state controls who has the guns which in a way helps gun owners every time someone who shouldn't have a gun goes on a shooting spree, the kneejerk backlash is onto gun owners.
    Lets take it to ludicrous extremes and say a few drinks now and again is good fun for most people but you are not going to go into a class of 12 year olds and say "Kids, beer is fun, crack open a can" more than likely you will endorse a education process that promotes responsible use of and awareness of alcohol.
    That is the kind of gun control I support, increased responsibility and awareness of the nature of gun ownership to appease anti gun people without interfering of the 2nd amendment rights of gun owners.
    I know this is a vastly theoretical answer and you quoted some logistics but I am non American so I was always likely give a somewhat neutral answer steeped in the hypothetical.

  • I'm for the right to bear arms,
    "1) Background checks are at their all time high and not enough FBI agents around to do them properly."
    Yeah, Thats the thing, everyone says we need background checks but how are we going to do them.
    "3) I live out in the country where I should be allowed to hunt and practice my marksmanship skills."
    I live in small town massachusetts and even with our insane gun laws I live close enough to a shooting range that I can gunshots from my house. Its only annoying like once or twice a year when they keep shooting till ten

    • I am however very anti Right to Arm Bears,
      Bears are dangerous enough even without them packing a.38 special

    • Show All
    • OK I'm not sure which state rubed the nanny state to the other state... Both States suck...

    • I'll agree to that.
      Its not like New England is entirely devoid of guns either like most people think
      Maine has some of the highest rates of gun ownership,
      Vermont and New Hampshire have no problem with guns.
      And you know what, All three of those states have generally nicer people.
      I think the reason MA's violent crime rate is higher, Is because people are all too frequently mean to each other

  • i honestly think that this is a huge problem. i mean i understand that owning a gun and maybe shooting at shit with it on your own property is fun. to use it in self defense against wildlife is totally legit. however i think it should not be allowed to carry a firearm to public places. i mean what re you going to use it for?

    here´s the problem: 100 sane people carrying a gun say at a mall = no problem but 1 mentally challanged and maybe depressed person carrying it going on a killing spree is a problem. in order for that not to happen it is in my opinion sensible to just not allow anybody other than law enforcement to carry a gun in public places.

    what you do in your own free time is of coruse completely up to you. if you want to carry a weapon to places where you could endanger others with it, you should have a very good reason to do so.

    • If there was someone with a legitimate conceal carry permit where most of the mass shootings have taken place they might have been able to eliminate the terrorist shooter and save many lives...

      Also most terrorist and grudge disgruntled shooters look for an easy target like no gun/weapon zones on campus, malls and other locations to open fire on innocent people these perpetrators look for no gun zones to do there heinous acts...

    • Show All
    • Grow up...

    • speak to you again, when you got rid of your pacifier :D

  • I support the Second Amendment.

    • You should it is your constitutional right to bear arms... It is your god given right to protect yourself, your property and your family...

    • Well I live in Canada so I don't have that right.
      Gun laws here are super restrictive.
      I can't wait till I go to Florida at the end of the month. The gun ranges are so much cheaper. If I could get my license there and somehow have it transferred over to Canada I'd save like $400.

  • It's basically a collectivism vs individualism question. Does the individual join society and consent to restrictions on his liberty for his advantage or is the society a thing with it's own purpose which imposes restrictions on it's parts for an overall benefit?