Right to Bear Arms

[Sunfrogolin]

Is the Right to Bear Arms stupid?

You know that shooting that took place in Arizona? Well I guess people want better gun laws. Not here, I don't know where. I just heard about it on the Facebook. Here in Tucson everyone is just sad and quiet. No one is calling for blood or revenge or tougher anything. If anything we are calling for more unity and togetherness. That goodness that comes out of people during a tragedy, we need that to come out more often. Like all the time. We are calling for that.

Anyway, I just read a post on the Facebook that said they like guns and want to keep them so I thought about it. As I understand it, the right to bear arms is there so the government won't push ordinary people around and create a bloody dictatorship thing. But if you think about it, the US military is so powerful and has such powerful weapons would we even stand a chance with our stupid pea shooter handguns? I think not. Sure there are militias around but how many? They would die instantly against a tank or an airplane. Basically, no matter how many guns we have the military has more, and more powerful ones, and bombs too, and a network of trained soldiers, and communications satellites and drones and all kinds of stuff that would kick our asses instantly. So what's the point of the Second Amendment. If the government did want to kill us the first thing they would do is ban guns and take ours away. What do you think?

[Grindslave]

No, the right to bear arms is not stupid. Although idiots are allowed to Possess guns, it ensures the right to self defense. It's a hard issue to accept for some People, but it's constitutional.

[flyboy51]

The point of the 2nd Amendment IS to protect all other rights, but its also for self defense and when you create more gun laws all you do is hurt law abiding people that want to own firearms. Do you really think people who dont obey the law to begin with when it comes to murder, rape, and drug dealing that theyre going to obey the gun laws??

And as for the military bit, this is why civlian government commands the military, and under purely constitutional means, the military would only have authority for action on congressional declaration of war...but thats a whole other issue...

[Sunfrogolin]

Do you think a government that attacks it's own people would care about the Constitution?

That's what I'm asking, self defense against who? The military is so powerful they could kill us instantly while eating a ham sandwich and not care.

Let's say you are in your house with your guns. How long would you last against a squad of soldiers? 15-20 minutes? Then they would bazooka your living room and blow the crap out of you.

Let's say you hide in a big building. Air strike. Game over. You lose.

Let's say you are in a crazy Arizona militia with 25 friends. Bazooka, tank, mortar, air strike, helicopter with machine gun that shoots a bajillion bullets per second. You lose. You can't really defend yourself against the government.

[Bifrost]

Originally Posted by Grindslave

No, the right to bear arms is not stupid. Although idiots are allowed to Possess guns, it ensures the right to self defense. It's a hard issue to accept for some People, but it's constitutional.

If it's illegal, less people will own one, and there will be less shootings, and you won't need to defend yourself as much. It's just logical.
You want to defend yourself from people with guns right? But what if you snap, and you're the bad guy, then you have a gun and you can kill people. Or, someone can break into your house and take it, and use it to shoot people.

Letting just anyone have a gun is stupid. Military and police should have them, but the rest of us should just stay away from them. USA has alot more gun related deaths than most countries, so maybe somethings wrong.
I don't understand how "There are alot of guns in this country, that's dangerous, maybe I need to get one" makes sense to anyone.

[Lemmy]

Europe doesnt have the right to bear arms and our gun crime is very low, knifes are different but not alot of guns, thats because it's illegal, its hard to make comparisons as the USA is a very large place compared to the UK and Europe

[Grindslave]

Originally Posted by Bifrost

If it's illegal, less people will own one, and there will be less shootings, and you won't need to defend yourself as much. It's just logical.
You want to defend yourself from people with guns right? But what if you snap, and you're the bad guy, then you have a gun and you can kill people. Or, someone can break into your house and take it, and use it to shoot people.

Letting just anyone have a gun is stupid. Military and police should have them, but the rest of us should just stay away from them. USA has alot more gun related deaths than most countries, so maybe somethings wrong.
I don't understand how "There are alot of guns in this country, that's dangerous, maybe I need to get one" makes sense to anyone.

Sure, I understand your position, but banning guns will not likely take down the crime rate, but sure, more people will not likely die of gun related deaths. However, if we were to take away the right to bear arms, that would eliminate the foundation of why the second amendment was put in place. The reason the founding fathers wanted to have these rights is because under english rule they had none, so when it came time to overthrow the oppressing government, they had to resort to guerilla warfare and stealing guns to fight. in the event that the government was to become oppressive again, it was an impertinent right for anyone to form a militia to fight back if need be. BUT, this was in 1776 when firearms were a lot more simple compared to today's standard. I think we should certainly take into consideration outlawing CERTAIN types of weaponry, but not all. (Fully automatic rifles and Pistols.)

[Sunfrogolin]

Do a lot of people get stabbed in Europe? Does anyone ever go crazy and stab a whole row of people like at the movies or something? Just wondering.

The Constitution thing is creeping me out too. Jared Laughner kept on talking about how his right to free speech was taken away in that video he made then when you talk to gun people they always bring up the constitution too. It's kind of creepy, like maybe gun people are the ones who shouldn't have any. Just saying.

[MorphyVSFischer]

Originally Posted by Sunfrogolin

Do you think a government that attacks it's own people would care about the Constitution?

That's what I'm asking, self defense against who? The military is so powerful they could kill us instantly while eating a ham sandwich and not care.

Let's say you are in your house with your guns. How long would you last against a squad of soldiers? 15-20 minutes? Then they would bazooka your living room and blow the crap out of you.

Let's say you hide in a big building. Air strike. Game over. You lose.

Let's say you are in a crazy Arizona militia with 25 friends. Bazooka, tank, mortar, air strike, helicopter with machine gun that shoots a bajillion bullets per second. You lose. You can't really defend yourself against the government.

One person with a pistol could not stop the Military. The entire nation using there pistols picking up the weapons from dead soldiers and doing whatever possible to resist the military would probably win in the long run

[Bifrost]

Originally Posted by Grindslave

Sure, I understand your position, but banning guns will not likely take down the crime rate, but sure, more people will not likely die of gun related deaths. However, if we were to take away the right to bear arms, that would eliminate the foundation of why the second amendment was put in place. The reason the founding fathers wanted to have these rights is because under english rule they had none, so when it came time to overthrow the oppressing government, they had to resort to guerilla warfare and stealing guns to fight. in the event that the government was to become oppressive again, it was an impertinent right for anyone to form a militia to fight back if need be. BUT, this was in 1776 when firearms were a lot more simple compared to today's standard. I think we should certainly take into consideration outlawing CERTAIN types of weaponry, but not all. (Fully automatic rifles and Pistols.)

Like you said this was in 1776, we need to get alittle more civilized. Also, weren't they still scared of englishmen taking control over their nation again back then? And they had those darn slaves to control, can't trust them. It wasn't the world we live in today. They had an enemy that was easy to spot and that they were all fighting against. You don't have that now. And your government isn't so bad you need to overthrow them. If you do get a dictator ruling your country, he'll be smart enough to get rid of those firearms anyway, so they won't help you then.