Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Do you believe that guns should be banned in the United States? (Page 2)
Anonymous
(18-24) 
Click "Show More" for your mentions
Most Helpful Opinion(mho) Rate.
Learn more
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
134Opinion
You don't just "discard" an amendment to the Constitution, especially one of the Bill of the Rights. The Constitution would have to be amended.
And firearms ownership is needed, especially in rural areas where there are dangerous animals and the police are far away. Criminals would have open season on law-abiding citizens if they know they aren't armed.
Apparently in Europe "firearm ownership" isn't needed and they're fine, so why is it needed here?
Well, Europe is far away, has very different crime rates and is very different demographically. Why didn't you use South Africa, Brazil, Ukraine or Central America to support your argument?
And there is some firearm ownership there.
Didn't a teacher just have his head removed in the middle of the day in the street in London because he hurt someone's feelings? Too bad he couldn't defend himself.
@TrueConfection: Excellent point
Fine? So having a violent crime rate 4-10x that of the US is fine? You are a special kind of stupid, miss
Hell no. I think guns are too regulated as it is. If anything, the current laws should be amended to make them less restricted and regulated so they’re more accessible to law abiding citizens. I also think there should be a price cap on ammunition, but that’s a while other conversation. Some of the laws and current restrictions are seriously stupid and don’t help anyone.
People might complain about whether they would be able to defend themselves if firearms were taken away such as in Japan or China but here in America, however there is one big aspect that needs to be taken into consideration, look at the numerous ways that people can defend themselves in those countries all because of one little phrase or series of actions. That phrase or series of actions is known as a martial arts way of life that not all of it has to be for good outcomes. Heck, someone that is cleaning a countertop can defend themselves by pouring ammonia in a bucket of 409 infused water and throw it on an attacker that is intending harm to end a confrontation. Me, I can defend myself with chopsticks and spoons.
That's retarded, and considering your profile picture, thats expected.
Just enforce the hundreds of laws on the books now instead of adding more clutter that everything gets lost in backround checks have been around for years but it sits on someones desk for years because of the lack of man power. The biggest problem is with THE DEMOCRATIC COMMUNIST PARTY OF AMERICA no bail before the cop finishes the paper work the bad guy is on the street again here in N. Y. C. the bad guys have been arrested up to four thime in one night for armed robbery but the turn them loose judges turn the poor things out on a no bail. Thank you Democrats Mayor Dumblasio And Killer Cuomo Guv,
You know why people usually shoot people? Because they know most people don't carry guns anymore and they don't have to worry about them shooting back. They don't fear their victims. Handguns are illegal inside the city limits of Chicago but they have the highest murder rate in the US. If you outlaw guns then only the criminals have guns, smart guy. Then the criminals fuck over all the law abiding citizens like in Mexico. If somebody is shooting at you, are you just going to stand there and get killed or do you want to shoot back so nobody else dies? Or do you want to live in a police state where there are government troops on every corner with assault rifles ruling your life? You need guns. You can't stop a killer with wishful thinking.
Anyone still pushing for gun control is just advertising that they live sheltered privileged lives. The world is a dangerous place and trying to use an overreaching and corrupt government to forcibly disarm your fellow citizens to be victimized is absolutely evil.
No because regardless the criminals will still be able to get their hands on them and the innocent citizens will be even more screwed than we already are… the cops are obviously no help in that area.. they continue to shoot and kill innocent bystanders and citizens.
The government took away guns from the citizens of Australia, then became tyrannical. The people have nothing left to defend themselves against government tyranny, oppression, and injustice. There’s your answer.
On the lighter side, consider this. Want to prevent drunk drivers from killing sober drivers? Take away driver’s licenses from sober drivers. Gun control is the same thing.
Or just look what the prohibition started… organized crime.
Yeah people don’t realize that once the government knows the people are defenseless and not armed. They’ll walk all over the people
Really? I live in Australia, and have my entire life. Tyrannical? Don't talk bullshit!
Are you vaccinated?
@Danny_dan92 No.
@Xtcy2083 You obviously don’t live in Sydney or Brisbane or Melbourne or other areas where citizens are literally confined to their homes and police come door-to-door verifying quarantine and arresting defenseless people in the streets. You are correct, this is not happening everywhere in Australia but at least you should be aware of the tyranny that’s taking place in your own country and how the world is watching.
^^^^
There were a few well-publicised incidents of people being harassed or arrested in the streets or in their homes, and you're right, I don't live in Sydney, Melbourne or Brisbane, and I know they have an absolutely rotten state government in Victoria at the moment (Dictator Dan), but it's not like we're living in China or North Korea either.
Things are very far from being ideal at the moment, but take a look at what's happening in places that are supposedly democratic, like Austria for example. Over there they now expect EVERYONE to be vaccinated, and you'll get into a lot of trouble if you're not. France isn't much better, so it's not really fair to always point to Australia and say something stupid like, "You see! They got rid of their guns, and that's why they're now living under a tyrannical regime". I mean, that's just utterly retarded.
She just brought up your country because of the topic at hand. The outright banning of all guns.
For example here in the US we still have the right to bear arms, and you don’t see any of the government responses that she mentioned above, happening anywhere. Even in deep blue states like California (which I live in, and have been dealing with some of the strictest regulations)
Oh, yes, absolutely.
(And spare me argumentum-ad-constuh'tushun because I've dismantled that plenty of times. Laws stand or fall on their own. Only bad laws need to be treated as unquestionable gospel in order to be defended.)
So you mean to tell me you dont believe in tyrannical governments is a possibility at all?
@vald9inches I don't believe holy law documents work as a deterrent, anyways.
Are you high now or something? Lol what are you even talking about holy law documents? You mean religion? And what does have to do with tyrannical governments?
@vald9inches
What the hell do tyrannical governments have to do with what I said?
If you have not noticed this question is about banning guns and you also said in your comment that any argument using the "constuh'tushun" (as you said it, which by the way makes you sound like an idiot that is against personal freedom and belong in some kind of Islamic country oh but wait that would be contradictory to a person such as your self because that very same society that is hell bent against freedom would hang or stone you or push you off a roof top... doesn't make much sense does it?) would be invalid because supposedly you have "dismantled that plenty of times". Sorry if i sounded mean but i take it personal when i see someone that is against personal freedom and would rather give up their liberty so that they can "feel safer"
Your analogy to an islamic hellhole is amusing due to the total lack of self-awareness -
I'm all for personal freedom - Disagreeing with a holy document (Your constuh'tushun or the Quran) isn't being against freedoms, it's believing that the populace should have the right to change their own laws based on what they actually think, as opposed to defending the law because it's the law.
If you think guns should be legal, OK, but all I ask is that you have a good argument for why you hold that position. "It's the law because it's the law because it's the law" is stupid and circular.
The opposite of opposing your constitution is that I am for freedom to control the law - you on the other hand have surrendered your right to an opinion.
My point about Islam was not an analogy it is a fact they will behead and kill homosexuals in various ways because thats what they believe. For you to put the constitution next to the quran is pretty damn cringe worthy bro lol they are total opposite belief systems. One is centered on personal freedom and separation of church and state and the other is a religious cult that believes in limiting personal freedom especially that of women and death to all infidels! Lmfao 😂🤣🤣🤣 how the hell can you confuse the two i have no idea! 😂🤣🤣🤣
@vald9inches
"One is centered on personal freedom and separation of church and state"
OK...
So try suggesting to someone that the constitution should be altered in some way.
Tell me what the response is.
While i do agree that the laws of a country should be flexible enough to change with the times and the people but the core laws and beliefs which were put in place for a good reason should not change unless the country itself no longer exists and is a new entity. And for the good argument that you are asking for again i ask you do you recognize tyrannical governments?
@vald9inches
What the hell do tyrannical governments have to do with this conversation?
You can't just insert 'Tyrannical governments' in a conversation with no context and expect it to mean something.
Are you forgetting chocolate milkshakes?
Ffs just answer my question you ask me for a good argument but when i try to give you one you begin to complain? Seriously? Or is it because you know where your answer will lead to so you cowardly try to stop all conversations before it gets there?
@vald9inches
You haven't asked a question!
"And for the good argument that you are asking for again i ask you do you recognize tyrannical governments?"
@vald9inches
... Yes? Tyrannical governments exist?
Omg was it that hard? Thank you! Lol ok so how would you stop a tyrannical government and dictator from taking over without guns?
I mean thats the whole reason why the forefathers who wrote the constitution made it so that citizens can arm themselves not only to defend their country from foreign invasion but to also defend themselves from tyrannical governments
@vald9inches
... You were just asking if tyrannical governments exist? I ignored that because it didn't seem relevant to anything. Now I actually see where you're going with this. Would it have been hard for you to just make an actual point from the start and not have wasted our time with a rhetorical?
"so how would you stop a tyrannical government and dictator from taking over without guns?"
You don't. With or without guns. A tyrannical government is already in control... because they're the government. That's what governments are.
Setting up facts for a discussion is never a waste of time... 🤦 Although flat out ignoring the question or keep asking why or changing the topic is excellent way to waste everyone's time!
So in your opinion any resistance is futile and we should all just give up on everything and just accept any tyrannical government because its inevitable?
@vald9inches
You didn't set up a fact. You asked me if something we both obviously know exists, exists.
If you continue to waste my time like this I'm done with you.
"So in your opinion any resistance is futile and we should all just give up on everything and just accept any tyrannical government because its inevitable?"
If a tyrannical government gets into power in the first place, yes - you've already had your chance to stop it and failed. Only outside forces can put a stop to that hypothetical government.
If your idea of a resistance is a couple of rednecks with rifles and a few hundred bullets against a first world superpower government that's already in control... Yeah, that resistance is absolutely futile.
I DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU BELIEVE! I AM NOT A PSYCHIC! Since you want to ban guns i am led to believe that you are not aware of tyrannical governments in history so to be sure and before i can continue with my argument i need to clarify on facts we can agree on! If you continue to excuse me of wasting time and therefore waste both of our time i will be done with you!
If a tyrannical government is in control you can argue about futility but the US has not reached 100% status of a tyrannical government and thats why guns rights are important to prevent tyrannical governments from taking over thats what the whole argument about gun rights are about.
And yes even one man with a gun and a bullet can change history just look at how world war 1 started
@vald9inches
"I DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU BELIEVE! I AM NOT A PSYCHIC!"
But you weren't asking what I believe, you were asking a rhetorical that seemed irrelevant to the conservation.
You can either just apologise or you can go away. Those are your two options. One or the other.
How is asking you if you recognize tyrannical governments or not a rhetorical question? It is a question i am legitimately asking for you to answer and you are the one who was playing dumb and not answering the question. It is obvious that you are trolling now GOOD DAY SIR!!
@vald9inches
OK, bye time waster. You knew you had asked a question that was seemingly pointless and that if you'd just clarified exactly where you were going sooner, this whole thing would be a lot further along by now. Not giving you any further chances to try and squirm away from the fact you wanted to play awkward games instead of just leading with a clear point like a sensible person.
If firearms are banned in the United States, then soon after that all other constitutional rights will be eliminated. Then we'll have civil war, IMHO.
I invoke the United States Declaration of Independence: . . . Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. . . .
Law biding citizens are not only protecting themselves and what's theirs, it's also protecting the sanctity of the US Constitution.
Then you lack brain cells and would be walking you and your whole family straight into a concentration camp because when the government finally disarms the people that is exactly what is gonna happen. Just look at Australia right now. They didn't even ban guns 100% but they banned them to a point and that was enough to throw them in covid camps. The government does not want people to live a long life. They want everyone either sick or dead. You give them the guns what do yu think is gonna happen? Use your brain. Every government that disarmed the people whacked them too.
Guns are the coolest thing since sliced bread. I think they are even cooler, because when a bad negro breaks into my house I can quickly shoot him with a gun, but I would have to wait for sliced bread to become hard to just knock him over the head with it! :-o
If you outlaw guns in the US, only outlaws will have guns in the US. It's an old cliché but it's 100% true now just as it was in the past. Guns will ALWAYS be readily available to criminals in the US in the same way drugs are readily available to pretty much anyone. That's because the US shares a border with Mexico and it will always be impossible to keep contraband from crossing that border.
The US is not Australia and it's not the UK. Outlawing guns in the US will never work even if we wanted it to. But we shouldn't. The 2nd amendment should be kept intact.
I believe the US Bill of rights cannot be ripped up, but I also believe with some clever manipulation there is a way to amend the rules in such a way to in effect render weapons useless.
Just ban the sale of ammo/ bullets except to gun clubs and licence the sales!
That way the constitution remains intact and every except for people who would do others harm can at least feel safer!
I think that the people who want to ban guns should be the people that have to come and take the guns without using guns. You shouldn't use other people's lives to do what you want. If you want to use guns to take guns away, then you are not actually anti-gun, you just want guns to be limited to people you approve of.
If guns were banned I'd be dead, several years ago I came out of a store into the parking lot and a guy was attacking a woman who I heard yelling for help.
I was parked nearby and yelled HEY and he charged me with a knife, stabbed me and slashed me. I will have a life long scar that will never heal cause of it.
Had I not been carrying I would be dead, as I had to open fire on him to safe my life and hers.
The world needs more people like you.
@LingyRolls Thanks
We need more people to have guns, get rid of licensing & registration, make guns easier to get
WHY SO PEOPLE HAVE THE POWER TO STOP A TOTALITARIAN GOVERNMENT FROM ENSLAVING US
PEOPLE NEED TO WAKE UP OR HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF
God (or darwin) made men and women, the constitution made them equal before the law, but it took Sam Colt to make them equal in defense.
The notion that a woman or child, raped, beaten, and murdered in an alleyway is somehow morally superior to that same person explaining to the cops how her attacker (s) wound up acquiring an acute rapid onset lead poisoning is highly offensive.
Of course not, overriding your own constitution/amendments that heavy handily would be the worst possible precedent to set.
Just find ways to make the background checks have a higher degree of accuracy and not take unreasonably long and you’ll be well on the way to selling the idea to the more right wing states.
I don’t, but I would be interested in hearing your reasons why.
My reasons are as follows. 1: outright banning firearms just plain wouldn’t work due to proliferation and the cost of enforcement. 2:as an Alaskan, firearms are about as important as a car. Calling the police works fine in anchorage in the summer, but a 12 gauge does a lot for peace of mind.