AD-17 - The Right to Bear Arms

[Morgoth]

Due to recent events in the USA and in order to alleviate the pressure to debate the issue I am re-starting this thread. Obviously this debate will include political viewpoints on both sides of the spectrum, but I respectfully ask that sensitivities to the events in Virginia be brought to the forefront of your mind before anyone decides to go into a rant at the expense of those who died. A first offence in this thread will carry a warning and an unlimited ban from the DoIMC forum, to be re-instated at the discretion of the Admins.

So, the US Bill of Rights states in the Second Amendment:

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.

Questions

1.In light of recent events and what appears to be a daily occurrence in towns and cities across the US, do you believe that the right to bear arms can still be upheld or do you think it is time to toughen up gun laws?

2. Is it necessary for a citizen to own a gun or guns?

3. What situations do you believe are right for a person to use a gun in anger?

4. If gun control is more a case of guns out of control, should the system as it stands be redeveloped into one of more collective responsibility? So for example, if you are a first-time gun owner, in order to own a gun and before you undergo a background check you must have one or even two sponsors, gun owners themselves with no criminal record, with a stipulation that the sponsors will be held in some way, accountable for the actions of the individual should the gun be used in anger?

5. Should there be a pyschological and other such evaluations in place for future gun owners to undertake? Maybe a program of training for all first-time gun owners?

6. Should authorities do more to clamp down on the sale of guns privately or at specialised fairs that cater for gun owners?

7. If you do not believe the law needs changing or that guns should be regulated better, what solutions do you propose to combat events like these from ever happening again?

[UAM]

Being Britishm I don't know all that much on the American Constitution or the laws there. But wasn't that written when there was no proper military so there was a need for the common people to be able to defend themselves and be able to use guns if there was a need for them to?

I think there definitely has to be tighter controls. After the Dunblane shootings there was a ban on guns in Britain, but gun crime seems to be on the rise again with more and more shootings, especially in London.

To answer the questions:

In light of recent events and what appears to be a daily occurrence in towns and cities across the US, do you believe that the right to bear arms can still be upheld or do you think it is time to toughen up gun laws?

I say toughen them up.

Is it necessary for a citizen to own a gun or guns?

No, not every citizen. Obviously some people need to, but they live in rural areas. There are people who need to hunt for their food. Surely it's illegal to shoot someone? If that is the case, then there is really no need for someone to own a gun when it is not absolutely necessary.

What situations do you believe are right for a person to use a gun in anger?

I'd like to say none, but I'm unsure, there may be exceptional cases that I just can't think of right now.

If gun control is more a case of guns out of control, should the system as it stands be redeveloped into one of more collective responsibility? So for example, if you are a first-time gun owner, in order to own a gun and before you undergo a background check you must have one or even two sponsors, gun owners themselves with no criminal record, with a stipulation that the sponsors will be held in some way, accountable for the actions of the individual should the gun be used in anger?

Hmm, I don't know. I don't really have any solutions to the problem.

Should there be a pyschological and other such evaluations in place for future gun owners to undertake? Maybe a program of training for all first-time gun owners?

Again, I'm unsure. I can see a few pros and cons in doing that.

Should authorities do more to clamp down on the sale of guns privately or at specialised fairs that cater for gun owners?

Is it true you can just buy guns off of anyone? They don't have to be a licenced seller or anything?

[Sile]

Yeah definitly. There has been 2 school massacres, that I'm aware off, in America. After 1 massacre in Dunblane primary school in the nineties the british government tightend up gun control. How easy is it to obtain a weapon in America you can go into a Walmart and just buy one. I was watching Micheal Moores bowling for Columbine, everyone should see that film. The part where the victim goes to Walmart headquarters and asks for a refund on the bullet still loged in his body shocking.

The 2nd ammendment is dated to a time when farmers etc needed to protect their lands from raiders. We live in the 21st century we have policemen for that job. It has been proven that you are more likely to be killed by a gun if you have one in your home than if you don't.

If a person is buying a gun it should be for hunting. There is no need for guns in the home. The majority of murder victims during burglaries are actually killed with their own guns. If you are a hunter keep your gun away from home.

[Ana-Magus]

I do not see a need for guns. period.

Today on The View, Rosie O'Donnell addressed this issue. After Columbine, she dedicated the next 5 years of her life to fight for gun control. She marched on Washington during the Million Mom March, where over 2 million American mothers gathered to protest and call for legislation. Absolutely NOTHING happened as a result. Rosie believes that the fight for gun control in the US is pointless, that nothing will ever change. The NRA is too powerful in this nation to allow any changes. I have to agree with her on this one.

Guns have gotten so out of control in this country, I don't see how it would be possible to bring order to this situation.

I understand that it's our constitutional right to bear arms, but when that right was written, our founding fathers could not foresee semi-automatic weapons in the hands of children aimed at classmates.

Resistance to change is killing this country faster than a lot of people realize.

[Mami]

Originally Posted by Ana-Magus

I do not see a need for guns. period.

Today on The View, Rosie O'Donnell addressed this issue. After Columbine, she dedicated the next 5 years of her life to fight gun control. She Marched on Washington during the Million Mom March, where over 2 million American mothers gathered to protest and call for legislation. Absolutely NOTHING happened. Rosie believes that the fight for gun control in the US is pointless, that nothing will ever change. The NRA is too powerful in this nation to allow any changes.

Guns have gotten so out of control in this country, I don't see how it would be possible to bring order to this situation.

I understand that it's our constitutional right to bear arms, but when that right was written, our founding fathers could not foresee semi-automatic weapons in the hands of children aimed at classmates.

Resistance to change is killing this country faster than a lot of people realize.

Sadly, I completely agree with this statement. There has been several shootings but nothing has been done to toughen the guns laws. I'm afraid even after this, nothing will happen again. Resistance to change is indeed the main problem. Is it possible that a new administration would be helpful in changing something? I'm hopeful about that.

[kala_way]

1.In light of recent events and what appears to be a daily occurrence in towns and cities across the US, do you believe that the right to bear arms can still be upheld or do you think it is time to toughen up gun laws? I believe the right should remain, however, I do agree that laws should be more stringent.

2. Is it necessary for a citizen to own a gun or guns? Necessary is such a subjective word--I believe most of the people who feel a gun is "necessary" use them for entertainment (target shooting, hunting, etc.). Also, some keep them for "protection", but it's difficult because you hear about people who've had someone break into their house armed and attacking them. The homeowner shoots the criminal and is then sued!

3. What situations do you believe are right for a person to use a gun in anger? In anger? none! If you are being attacked by someone with a gun and you are able to shoot them, I would say that is acceptable, but I hardly think that's considered "in anger"

4. If gun control is more a case of guns out of control, should the system as it stands be redeveloped into one of more collective responsibility? That's an interesting direction. I would be interested to know what sort of punishment would be put on the person who was "responsible" for the person who commits a crime with a gun.

5. Should there be a pyschological and other such evaluations in place for future gun owners to undertake? Maybe a program of training for all first-time gun owners? Though that might be a good thing, I can't imagine it ever happening. The money and coordination it would take I think would be beyond the pale of the legislation.

6. Should authorities do more to clamp down on the sale of guns privately or at specialised fairs that cater for gun owners? yes


I would be interested in knowing if there are any statistics on what percent of gun crimes are perpetrated using guns acquired through "legal" means as opposed to illegally acquired arms?

[eildydar]

So where do we keep the guns we use for entertainment such as hunting or target practice? Bury them in the woods and hope we find them again? If you are going to own guns put them in a gun case its as simple as that. Guns under lock and key get rid of the problem of them being stolen and used for crimes. It's our constitutional right to have firearms. People that do these kind of things are criminals you can't honestly believe that getting rid of guns is going to help? They want to kill people, guns aren't the only means for this.

[purplehawk]

1.In light of recent events and what appears to be a daily occurrence in towns and cities across the US, do you believe that the right to bear arms can still be upheld or do you think it is time to toughen up gun laws?

No. I think gun control legislation is long past-due

2. Is it necessary for a citizen to own a gun or guns?

No.

3. What situations do you believe are right for a person to use a gun in anger?

I can't think of one.

4. If gun control is more a case of guns out of control, should the system as it stands be redeveloped into one of more collective responsibility? So for example, if you are a first-time gun owner, in order to own a gun and before you undergo a background check you must have one or even two sponsors, gun owners themselves with no criminal record, with a stipulation that the sponsors will be held in some way, accountable for the actions of the individual should the gun be used in anger?

No. Guns should be outlawed. Period. Gads, I can see the NRA sending out mentors to accomplish this sponsorship business.

5. Should there be a pyschological and other such evaluations in place for future gun owners to undertake? Maybe a program of training for all first-time gun owners?

At the very least. I'd still prefer to have guns gone.

6. Should authorities do more to clamp down on the sale of guns privately or at specialised fairs that cater for gun owners?

Yes.

7. If you do not believe the law needs changing or that guns should be regulated better, what solutions do you propose to combat events like these from ever happening again?

I'll be interested in reading answers to this one.

Originally Posted by Ana-Magus

Resistance to change is killing this country faster than a lot of people realize.

Absolutely.

[Sile]

Originally Posted by eildydar

So where do we keep the guns we use for entertainment such as hunting or target practice? Bury them in the woods and hope we find them again? If you are going to own guns put them in a gun case its as simple as that. Guns under lock and key get rid of the problem of them being stolen and used for crimes. It's our constitutional right to have firearms. People that do these kind of things are criminals you can't honestly believe that getting rid of guns is going to help? They want to kill people, guns aren't the only means for this.

Well hunters could keep them in locked storage areas near the hunting areas, which are usually a good few miles away from residential areas. Yeah if you are that disturbed nothing will stop you from starting but if you're not using a semi-automatic weapon you're going to kill a lot less people before you are stopped.

[Neptune]

Originally Posted by eildydar

So where do we keep the guns we use for entertainment such as hunting or target practice? Bury them in the woods and hope we find them again? If you are going to own guns put them in a gun case its as simple as that. Guns under lock and key get rid of the problem of them being stolen and used for crimes. It's our constitutional right to have firearms. People that do these kind of things are criminals you can't honestly believe that getting rid of guns is going to help? They want to kill people, guns aren't the only means for this.

The man who killed those people at Virginia Tech didn't steal a gun, he bought one. This means any person who is mentally unstable can go buy a gun. If he were unable to buy a gun or unable to steal a gun.. this would not have happened the way it did. If citizens were unable to have guns then this would not have happened the way it did... 32 people would not have been shot to death and a number of people injured if it was illegal to own a gun!

Locking up your gun wont stop people from stealing it if they really want it, but if there was no guns there to be stolen or bought then these tragedy that involve gun violence would have never occurred!

Here's a piece of the article that said he bought his own gun....

One law enforcement official said Cho's backpack contained a receipt for a March purchase of a Glock 9 mm pistol. Cho held a green card, meaning he was a legal, permanent resident, federal officials said. That meant he was eligible to buy a handgun unless he had been convicted of a felony.

Roanoke Firearms owner John Markell said his shop sold the Glock and a box of practice ammo to Cho 36 days ago for $571.

"He was a nice, clean-cut college kid. We won't sell a gun if we have any idea at all that a purchase is suspicious," Markell said. Markell said it is not unusual for college kids to make purchases at his shop as long as they are old enough.

YAHOO NEWS

[eildydar]

Why should I be punished for the crimes of others? And the argument that 32 people wouldn't be dead is not solid. The guy was obviously not right in the head correct? Obviously he wanted to kill people. So either he is going to kill a few or find a way to kill more people. Either way people are dying the gun is not the problem the crazy kid is.

If people are determined enough to get a few guns out of a gun case im pretty sure that the lack of guns isn't going to stop them from committing crimes so really the point is moot. It all comes down to why am i being punished in not being able to engage in my entertainment because some people are crazy. Also it is my right to bear arms. We outlaw guns we will just have to outlaw knives next...criminals are going to stop committing crimes simply because you take away one of their tools.

[purplehawk]

Eildydar, there must be an huge number of mentally unstable gun owners in this country then. One has only to look at statistics of death by gunshot.

It's tim we stopped blaming the victims - including, in this case, the shooter who was obviously disturbed. The problem lies with the gun lobby in this country.

[Eileithyia]

Originally Posted by eildydar

Why should I be punished for the crimes of others? And the argument that 32 people wouldn't be dead is not solid. The guy was obviously not right in the head correct? Obviously he wanted to kill people. So either he is going to kill a few or find a way to kill more people. Either way people are dying the gun is not the problem the crazy kid is.

If people are determined enough to get a few guns out of a gun case im pretty sure that the lack of guns isn't going to stop them from committing crimes so really the point is moot. It all comes down to why am i being punished in not being able to engage in my entertainment because some people are crazy. Also it is my right to bear arms. We outlaw guns we will just have to outlaw knives next...criminals are going to stop committing crimes simply because you take away one of their tools.

Exactly. People who want to do harm to others will find ways of doing it, and they don't need guns. The problem is not gun-ownership, the problem is the mental issues of people who use them improperly.

You take away all guns, I guarantee that a criminal will simply do his dirty deeds with a knife, a club, a brick, or whatever weapon is at hand. Criminals do not become criminals because they have access to guns.

[eildydar]

I'm not denying that criminals are lazy. They use the easiest method they have available sure that doesn't mean that crimes will stop if we ban guns. This is going to sound insensitive but I don't care about the shooters mental health. if it was noticed he should be locked up it shouldn't be our problem to monitor everyone that is off their rocker like this. It's an excuse nothing more. Alot of people have problems are able to work through them why was this guy so special that he had to take it to killing then be able to use it as an excuse. Take responsibility for your own actions is all im asking.

[purplehawk]

No, Eildydar, the excuses come from the gun lobby and its distressing habit of blaming everyone else for the problems they cause.

[Sile]

Originally Posted by eildydar

Why should I be punished for the crimes of others?

I'm sorry but how are you being punished. I can't see the joy in killing anything. We all know how powerful the NRA is in America and there is no way there will be a total ban on guns but why do you need a semi-automatic to kill deer? Why do you need to keep it in your home with your family if it is solely used for hunting. If the park rangers who control the hunting areas could provide an area where you can lock your rifle away would you use. It's time americans put the 'they're all out to get me attitude' before something else happens. How many people need to die before something is done?

[Cherub]

Thanks for starting this thread Morgoth, I was wondering when someone would.

1.In light of recent events and what appears to be a daily occurrence in towns and cities across the US, do you believe that the right to bear arms can still be upheld or do you think it is time to toughen up gun laws?

They need to be toughened up.

2. Is it necessary for a citizen to own a gun or guns?

I suppose that if they are a farmer or hunter then I can see why they'd own a gun, but not your average joe on the street.

3. What situations do you believe are right for a person to use a gun in anger?

There aren't any.

4. If gun control is more a case of guns out of control, should the system as it stands be redeveloped into one of more collective responsibility? So for example, if you are a first-time gun owner, in order to own a gun and before you undergo a background check you must have one or even two sponsors, gun owners themselves with no criminal record, with a stipulation that the sponsors will be held in some way, accountable for the actions of the individual should the gun be used in anger?

I don't think that the sponsers should be held accountable in some way for that person's actions, no one truly know how someone is going to act in a moment of madness or anger. But I do like the idea of the background checks etc.

5. Should there be a pyschological and other such evaluations in place for future gun owners to undertake? Maybe a program of training for all first-time gun owners?

I don't know. I think that only farmers/hunters etc should be allowed guns, so they should have to prove the need for owning a gun.

6. Should authorities do more to clamp down on the sale of guns privately or at specialised fairs that cater for gun owners?

Yes. The sale of guns privately shouldn't be allowed.

7. If you do not believe the law needs changing or that guns should be regulated better, what solutions do you propose to combat events like these from ever happening again?

NA

[Eileithyia]

Originally Posted by purplehawk

No, Eildydar, the excuse comes from the gun lobby and it's distressing habit of blaming everyone else for the problems they cause.

It's a rather distressing habit people have of blaming the NRA for every gun related crime, as well.

Guns are not the problem. Criminals, and the environmental conditions that create criminals, are the problem.

[eildydar]

You do realize that hunting isn't the only form of use of recreational firearm use. There is target practice as well as many other things. Although yes i believe that a semi-automatic gun is completely acceptable for hunting. I have a semi automatic shotgun i use for bird hunting which is completely legal. Also just because you don't agree with hunting doesn't mean a large population of the country agrees. I have hunted and fished all my life. Because someone is crazy i have to quit what me and my family love to do together?

[CaptConfederacy]

Originally Posted by Morgoth

Due to recent events in the USA and in order to alleviate the pressure to debate the issue I am re-starting this thread. Obviously this debate will include political viewpoints on both sides of the spectrum, but I respectfully ask that sensitivities to the events in Virginia be brought to the forefront of your mind before anyone decides to go into a rant at the expense of those who died. A first offence in this thread will carry a warning and an unlimited ban from the DoIMC forum, to be re-instated at the discretion of the Admins.

So, the US Bill of Rights states in the Second Amendment:

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.

Questions

1.In light of recent events and what appears to be a daily occurrence in towns and cities across the US, do you believe that the right to bear arms can still be upheld or do you think it is time to toughen up gun laws?

2. Is it necessary for a citizen to own a gun or guns?

3. What situations do you believe are right for a person to use a gun in anger?

4. If gun control is more a case of guns out of control, should the system as it stands be redeveloped into one of more collective responsibility? So for example, if you are a first-time gun owner, in order to own a gun and before you undergo a background check you must have one or even two sponsors, gun owners themselves with no criminal record, with a stipulation that the sponsors will be held in some way, accountable for the actions of the individual should the gun be used in anger?

5. Should there be a pyschological and other such evaluations in place for future gun owners to undertake? Maybe a program of training for all first-time gun owners?

6. Should authorities do more to clamp down on the sale of guns privately or at specialised fairs that cater for gun owners?

7. If you do not believe the law needs changing or that guns should be regulated better, what solutions do you propose to combat events like these from ever happening again?

Answers:

1) Yes, the right to bear arms can still be upheld. It is a Constitutionally-protected right, after all. As to gun laws, we have thousands on the books already.
2) Yes, it is necessary. There is the matter of self-defense. There is the matter of a person who likes to sport shoot or hunt.
3) Anger? I'm not sure I understand the question.
4) No, I cannot support that. The background checks I've no problem with, though.
5) I wouldn't be opposed to gun safety classes in schools.
6) I don't know if you could ever clamp down on privately sold guns. As to the fairs, there are background checks that are required at least in Kentucky to sell a weapon.
7) As hard as it may be to face, some situations cannot be remedied. We accept some things because we are a free society. About the best thing I could recommend is being more careful to whom student visas are given.

Originally Posted by purplehawk

Eildydar, there must be an huge number of mentally unstable gun owners in this country then. One has only to look at statistics of death by gunshot.

It's tim we stopped blaming the victims - including, in this case, the shooter who was obviously disturbed. The problem lies with the gun lobby in this country.

I fail to see the wisdom in blaming others for what the murderer actually did.