To start, such a ban would be unconstitutional. Whatever the practical merits for a ban, to implement one would require amending the Bill of Rights - specifically the Second Amendment. The Bill of Rights have traditionally been held sacrosanct. Open that kettle of fish and beware! It is hard to predict what will happen once one amendment has been modified.
Beyond that, in general, I remain an advocate of moderate gun control. Things like gun confiscations, buy backs and the like going too far, but recognizing that no right is absolute but is always weighed against other rights and practical considerations. In that connection the recent spate of violence, which is not unknown before in the nation's history, has not really changed very much. The same balancing act remains.
However, what has modified my views somewhat was the recent violence in places like Seattle, where the state essentially abdicated its most basic and fundamental responsibility, i. e. the protection of life and property. This all in the name of an absurd quasi-Utopianism, a. k. a. "the summer of love."
Thomas Hobbes famously wrote in "Leviathan" that life in the state of nature is "nasty, brutish and short." Therefore the state exists to restrain human nature and maintain order, stability and security.
Not surprisingly, when the state walks away - deliberately and consciously - from its most basic obligation, then people have no choice but to fall back upon themselves and thus guns take on a more urgent and elemental need. The public left to the tender mercies of man unrestrained by morals or law and being unable to turn to the state for basic security - a state that is, in the case of democracy, ultimately accountable to the public it is charged with protecting.
Thus at the most basic level, the need for a prudent level of gun control has not changed. Seattle and the like, even in this tumultuous period, being the exception and not the rule. However, that conclusion being contingent on the reliability of the state to enforce the laws, protect the social order and give to security to the individual.
Put more simply, the laws as they currently stand are not unreasonable. However, proposals for guy backs, gun bans and confiscations - all already at variance with the 2nd Amendment anyhow - should be strenuously opposed and rejected.
The state has - in places like Seattle, Minneapolis, NYC, and San Francisco - proven itself inconsistent and unreliable in the execution of its most fundamental duty. No citizen of any nation should be obliged to depend upon such a feckless guardian. Put simply, a gun ban will not compensate for the dereliction of duty to which, of late, government seems prone.
'IDIOTS' should be made 'illegal'!
When I applied to become a police officer, I was REQUIRED to pass the Minnesota Multiphase Personality Inventory (MMPI) and a basic polygraph before I could be entrusted to move openly-armed amid the general public and intervene in emotionally-charged situations.
Many jurisdictions have upon their books criminal statutes for irresponsible storage of firearms not immediately upon your person or within your immediate control.
SADLY for POLITICAL ASPIRATION reasons, SELDOM is such abuse criminally-prosecuted even as a misdemeanor involving the Owner's minor's misuse resulting in injury or loss of life.
Such firearms owners are not MATURE enough to POSSESS such deadly devices.
Such ownership is NOT the intention of the 2nd Amendment to defend home & family.
In my own youth, as a Cub Scout our Scout Master provided a life-changing demonstration
involving a melon at less than 20 ft. and a REAL revolver with LIVE ammunition.
The ensuing demonstration was SEARED in our young memories; ... to NEVER assume ANY gun was 'safe' and unloaded UNTIL YOU PERSONALLY opened the action CONFIRMING IT WAS 'EMPTY'. And...
even then, to not transit the weapon's barrel across ANYTHING you did not intend to ABSOLUTELY
destroy! The Scout Master invited us to TRY to restore the melon the weapon's concussive blast had shattered. GAME, SET and MATCH!
Today's ultra-realistic graphic video games leave LITTLE to the imagination and many city-raised self-indulgent youths seek to CONFIRM those game's realism.
Real Life unlike those games has NO 'reset' do-over options.
You cannot UNDO what you have irrevocably taken, ... that was NOT 'your's to take.
As both a combat veteran and L. E. Officer I have had occasion to end human life
at least once "up close and looking his eyes as he died" personal.
I can only sleep peacefully because in EACH instance I'd given my Adversary
the option to stand down, ... to withdraw to a lesser option in the time THEY'D allowed me.
The 'wisdom of Solomon' in 7/10th's of second.
I wept LATER, but did as needs be done.
I WAS going home to MY family; HE forced MY choice~
MANY would-be juvenile inner-city 'gangstah's want 'street creds' here in Fla.
and will uncaringly loose rounds with a nominal effective lethality of more than a mile!
yet when THEY'RE defensively shot 'Black Lives Matter' wail:
"He wub a gud boy who lubs his Momma"
I think NOT. ALL lives matter~
To me, ESPECIALLY MINE and MY family >:(
Where I live, it can be an hour for police to show up. If some guy is attacking me, with a knife or his bare fists, even if I manage to call for help... what are the chances I'll be alive by the time police show up?
Guns are essential for self defense, they are the great equalizers. Now maybe I could go with outlawing them if you want to put a cop within 30 seconds of each call.
They are already highly regulated, there is 30,000 plus gun laws in the USA, rather than add new laws, just enforce the existing ones better.
Nobody but me can keep me safe, it is our own job for our own protection the police's job is to cleanup the mess. The SCOTUS has ruled in several cases that law enforcement has no legal obligation to protect anyone.
RIGHT
im not a fan of guns
and i dont think they should be easily available anywhere
BUT
the US
the thing is
what are they gonna do
take everybody's guns? no
if they can regulate guns and their usage
that is WAYYY safer
than making it illegal
Opinion
132Opinion
Nope. They should always be available for purchase by people who have no history of violent crimes. Gun ownership is necessary for self defense. https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/pregnant-woman-in-lithia-uses-ar-15-to-shoot-armed-intruder/2043667/?amp
Even if some treasonous far left wing administration tries to ban guns in the future. It will be a new prohibition era where instead of alcohol production and distribution being banned, it’s guns being banned.
And just like in the prohibition era where people found work arounds (speakeasies, moon shining) to acquire alcohol. People will find work arounds (Zip guns, 3D prints, off grid work shops) to acquire guns in a hypothetical anti gun prohibitionist America.
You want guns banned, then move to a left wing country like England or communist China where most guns are banned. Cause as long as we have a constitution, the second amendment shall not be infringed.
People once thought that banning alcohol in America would virtually eliminate alcohol-related problems. People couldn't drink, so no drunken fights or people being too hung over to go to work. How could things not be better?
The reality was quite different. The Mafia got rich supplying alcohol to people, which greatly increased corruption at all levels of government, and enabled the mob to fund other criminal activities, such as gambling, drugs, prostitution, and human trafficking. It also caused an explosion in gang violence, which frequently spilled over onto the general public, with many innocent people being maimed and killed.
Consumption of alcohol actually increased significantly, while general respect for the law fell. This constitutional amendment was a huge failure at every level, and it was repealed in less than a dozen years.
In the US, the most dangerous places to be (Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit, NYC) are all places where guns have been banned for decades, while the safest places have the least restrictions.
The US Border Patrol intercepted several TONS of cocaine and over 10,000 pounds of fentanyl (a couple of micrograms can kill you) just over the summer months this year on the southern border, and they acknowledge that most of it is still getting through. Why do you imagine that they wouldn't add guns to the menu if they were banned in the US?
Are you even aware of the fact that the US Supreme Court has ruled that the police have no responsibility to protect you, or even show up if you call? If they are busy elsewhere, they can legally ignore your pleas for help. And they often do.
Is that really the world you want to live in? Did you know that in Australia, right now, police are tracking citizens and if they decide you might have been exposed to COVID, they are pulling people out of their homes at gun point and putting them in internment camps for 10-14 days, with no due process. Vax status is irrelevant. Many people test negative and never develop COVID, but they are taken anyway. Disarmed Aussies can only comply. Do you want that?
Good idea then everyone will have a gun. The concept of the gun is like a three-headed Hydra cut off one head another one grows back except that every time you attack the gun lobby you only make it stronger and if you do manage to pass sweeping reform bills on firearms manufacturing and ownership restrictions then you increase the black market for a legal production and sales of these weapons to such a degree that there will be at least 5 to 10 guns for every citizen in this country and guns would be sold illegally in vending machines which cops won't even bother trying to take off the streets anymore because it's a losing battle. It would be like that video game Skud.
""If you want a gun go to the nearest vending machine, but if you want someone dead and you don't have the nerve to do it yourself you need more than guns, you need a Skud to hold them for you""
That's just great now we'll have guns and everything vending machine and the vending machine next to those guns will be robotic disposable assassins to a place those guns in his hands and let him go to work.
OP, thoughts like yours are exactly why the Second Amendment is so precious. Without weapons, citizens would not be able to defend against government tyranny. 2A exists because we were founded by defying a tyrant. Look at Nazi Germany. If Germany back then had an equivalent to 2A there would never have been a WW2 because the citizens being persecuted could have fought back. Look at Europe now. Every nation in Europe bans citizens having weapons. Even those nations that are so called "Democratic" sometimes make laws representing the government and not the people and those citizens can do nothing about it. EVERY government thinks they know what is best for their people. That does not mean they actually do know what is best. Also, comparing gun crimes in America to Europe is not exactly accurate because the US is much larger than any individual country in the EU. The ONLY reason Europe bans weapons is because of the founding of the US and to prevent the government from ever losing control again.
Honestly I understand both sides. On one hand, some of these people have had these guns in their families so it's basically a heirloom and more than likely more valuable to them than anything else. of course with proper gun training and proper used along with proper lock up, i think a lot of mass shootings would be stop. Of course their are people who shouldn't have guns and I think the government should look deeper into these people. On the other hand tho, Guns are dangerous and they are used for only war, for killing. So why should citizens have it? most people would say their isn't a reason. Than theirs these mass shootings along with the fact that they don't ocurr in any other nation. Both sides have a decent argument and both have a valid counter argument to me anyway. As for my personal opinion, anything can be used to kill people, the question is how do we stop these from happening? my response to that question is to go down the rabbit hole ( the mental/emotional state ) of these people and try to understand why they do it so we can better prevent it along with finding it and helping that person recover from such a awful state. I am not sure how getting rid of guns will solve anything simply because a lot of the weapons of war can be easily made and all the things needed to build it are legal in most parts of the world. Of course we can't build tanks but you can build a lot of other awful weapons of war and they if used properly can kill even more people than guns have in a even shorter period of time. So to me regardless of the weapon, the mind is the most dangerous thing a human being can used, so I feel like targeting that would be better.
Look at every country that banned guns there crime rates went up or there own government went out of control. lool at the states that have extremely strict gun laws or even cities, there crime rates are through the roof. we dont need more gun laws we need to enforce the ones that we already have. it been proven that if you allow your citizens to arm and protect thereselves the crime goes down not up. all this information is through the FBI. the people that saw lets ban them etc have never handled them have no education on them etc. the news reporter that said when you fired the so called weapon of war the assault rifle "ar15" 1st off is a lying fool and said he suffered from temp. PTSD from the violent explosion and temp. hearing closed etc is a far left antigun nut job. let see the black Texas politician that told the media that she picked up a ar15 and weighted as much as 10 fully loaded moving boxs and fires a 50cal bullet is also a lying fool. if you want to ban firearms and the 2nd amendment then tou gotta ban knives bats cars truck bars alcohol bottles etc bc anything and everything is a weapon and while your at it then lets ban your freedom of speech oh by the way is used incorrectly by so many people and while your at it ban every other amendment and every right that you have bc the government will not stop at the 2nd amendment.
Anyone who thinks guns should be banned has never been put in a position to have to protect or look after the safety of anyone in their entire lives. So of course they would choose the option that doesn't apply to them whatsoever.
It'd be like asking me if I think crop tops should be banned, even though I'm not a woman or wear such clothing. Actually, it's worse, cause the assholes not only have nothing to do with the topic at hand, but want to restrict others from using them as well. So it'd be like me asking crop tops to be banned despite them not being banned not affecting my life whatsoever.
But you know. People are gonna people.
Yes in my opinion they should be banned, but that's somebody speaking that's not from the US. My big reason why they should be banned or at least a lot more strict about it is because in my country shootings are pretty rare. It's not like in the US were every day you have shootings. The numbers don't lie. If you are more strict about guns less shootings will happen. Of course there will always be criminals using guns but I'm talking more about school shooting and attacks out of hate. These type of shootings are pretty rare in Europe.
If all the guns are banned in the US... what would happen to:
☑ the 2A nuts. They will squawk about how their rights are violated
☑ the Trump Supporters who love their 2A
☑ the Rittenhouses of the world
☑ the George Zimmerman's of the World
☑ The poor redneck white dude who catches a black man in his daughters bed
☑ The poor redneck white dude who catches a black man in bed with his wife
USA is kinda like that friend who has an addiction and need intervention because their addiction is taking over their life. So yeah, it would help if you could ban guns but its not like they would go quietly. It would be a long and painful struggle to curb USA's gun addiction.
No, but I also acknowledge that they don't seem to have done any good at all. The only way a ban could ever possibly improve things is if even the most diehard gun clutcher (always hiding in a bunker when the mass shooters show up in malls or grade schools - if not turning out to be the mass shooter) is personally affected by the negative effects. But the only conditions under which that could happen in a widespread sense involve some sort of collapse of society, at which point there would be no mechanism for collecting the existing guns. And anyway, if civilization does fall in the US, and the rule of law with it, there are just way too many people who have been lied to about other people and have been murederously enraged for decades. Personally, I'd take the opportunity to go right for the liars: make sure they don't escape the consequences of the effects the greedy and detached lies they told had on real people.
The second amendment , and the utterly ludicrous actions of the gun lobby are the issue , just how many people have to be needlessly killed? And yet we will discuss this same issue over and over and over again , until the next major shooting , when more guns will be sold.
On any measure of even remote logic , guns need to be removed , but of course they won't be , crazy lunacy.
Another ignorant simpleton.
As usual... the mafias, cartels, gangs, criminals, drive by shooter, robbers, rapists, car jackers, home invaders... etc.
All of those who have never gotten a legal gun in their lives and who are responsible for the vast majority of shootings and murders will just keep on ignoring laws and using their black market guns.
You, and your ilk, as usual, are obsessed with John and Jane Doe in the suburbs getting a legal, regulated gun in their home. That is all you are worried about.
Only ignorant people want to ban guns. Criminals will still have them and kill you. the less law abiding people that have guns the more criminals will use them. The cities and states with the strictest gun laws also have the highest gun violence crime.
People are naturally violent too and will kill you with plenty of other things. Women especially should support the second amendment. If there were no guns many men could easily break into houses and rape and murder women any day they felt like it.
Nope.
But I don't see why one should own a rifle, let alone an armory that can arm a small militia for "self defense".
But hey, they like their guns and get irritated when anyone suggests to "limit" the ownership.
Yes, 2nd amendment exists, it was also created (1791) before the era of modern guns. And while we are on that argument, the word "amendment " also exist, and the current
amendment can be changed again. But no one will do that w/o risking losing the election/public support.
So, go freedom?
Well, if you start taking away constitutional rights, where does that stop? Clearly the 4th amendment has to go as well so the police can go door to door to search for guns, otherwise a ban on guns would be useless because the US doesn't keep a firearm registry.
And then that's where things get problematic for the idea of not having a civil war.
I'm not an American so it's hard for me to be able to judge this.
Personally I think that firearms should be banned or subject to strict conditions like in Japan for example. Besides, I don't think that owning a gun really protects you from aggression or from a crazy person.
However again this is not a judgment on the Americans, it s just my personal opinion on this.
I am with the majority and agree that guns should (and will always) be legal. We do need some serious work nationwide to correct the flaws in the current system that allows guns to be bought and sold so easily.
Secondly should have a federal law which if you use a gun or knife to commit ANY crime you get automatic death sentence carried out immediately after being found guilty on actual evidence not circumstantial evidence.
No I carry now. I’ve been sexually assaulted then years later the same guy tried breaking into my car which means he was following me to remember… I didn’t know the protective order had expired. So next time I will be using self defense if it ever comes to that.
No, I voted B because there are too many people who live in remote areas and would not be able defends themselves and law enforcement could take too long to arive and other people who live in areas with high crime, having a gun could be a means of survival.
You can also add your opinion below!
