Should Amercia have the right to bear arms?

Brian

Given its historical context, the second amendment does seem antiquated. The oft quoted "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" is taken out of context and the first half of the amendment is generally ignored. However, if the amendment is read in its entirety, its meaning changes dramatically. For example, "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" can be easily interpreted to mean that the right of citizens to keep and bear arms was considered a necessity at the time due to the use of militia in warfare and the lack of a standing army. Today, however, the use of militia is wholly unnecessary. As for a gun-less nation, there is no direct correlation between violence and gun ownership. For example, the United Kingdom's percentage of violent crime is similar to the United State's. The United Kingdom, however, has very strict gun control laws and the private ownership of firearms is tightly regulated. The problem, it would seem, is a society's propensity for violence.

frofro32

Um, no. The Bill of Rights serves as a protection to us. Perhaps you should read up on the actual purpose of the second amendment. Yes, that would be a brilliant idea, a government run armed military and armless civilians. I think that's an awful idea, thank goodness our founding fathers thought the same.

S P

If you start saying one amendment is out of date, then you can claim any amendment is out of date if it suits you.

Joseph B

Be honest with yourself all things that are illegal only hinder law abiding Citizens! If you were to make it illegal for people to bear arms all hell would break loose. Thugs would rule the Streets cops would be in court for Excessive Force. What in the world would you think would you think a criminal would be a Law abiding citizen?

flika

Law abiding citizens, "completely gun-less?"

Hell no!

Red

You think that the right to protect our homes is out of date...where the heck do you live, Fantasy Land? Although our current Pres and the rest of the Libs would like to believe that we reside in this 'non-violent, tree hugging, peaceful land of rainbows and fairies', unfortunately that just isn't the case. We are entitled to protect our home, family, and ourselves from the threat of violence.

Stricter measures for obtaining gun permits should be implemented in an effort to limit the amount of gun violence- if that is what your general concern is.

Adam

Yes, the whole basis for the 2nd Amendment is for the people to have the means to protect themselves from an overbearing government.

Those that use guns for criminal reasons are going to get a gun regardless and I'd say 9 out of 10 of those criminals didn't get the gun at a gunshop anyhow.

Jessica Rabbit

I have the right to bear arms. Anyone thinking that this is something that needs to be abolished is a fool. It will always be my right to bear arms as the NRA is too well established within congress for this amendment to be overturned. Thanks to the current administration the ownership of guns is more popular than ever. There are some issues getting ammunition for these weapons but, overall, it is a good time to invest in weapons manufacturing companies.

Stonewall

Of course we should. We must not compromise any of our freedoms for any reason, but certainly not just because some people believe that they are outdated.

There's an old saying- "God made man, but Sam Colt made them equal". How else can an 80 year old man or a 5 ft 90 lb. woman defend themselves from an average sized, healthy young man who intends to harm them? The police CAN NOT protect you. Arresting the guy who killed you or raped you is all well and good, but it doesn't help you much does it? Your safety is your responsibility wether you want to accept it or not.

Furthermore, if the citizens can not have guns, why should the police?
That is the very definition of tyranny. Seriously, why would they need them?

That's what I think.

Hermione

I bet if you were out in the wilderness and a bear or cougar was stalking you, you would want a gun. Or if you lived in an inner city jungle and worked late hours, you would want to have the option of owning a gun to protect yourself.

Sam C

Yes, ordinary citizens should retain the right to bear arms.

The nation would be worse off if orinary citizens did not have the right to bear arms.

It is very important that we retain our second amendment rights because we the people are not guaranteed that we will not have to fight another revolution in order to protect our freedom.

Our fore fathers had just fought and won a revolution from a tyrannical government when the Second Amendment was written. Our fore fathers knew the importance first hand.

Gun control is the first step to conquering a nation.

All dictators have done it.

The Socialist, Nazis, Facists and Communists have done it.

Hijackers and Terrorist do it.

Semper Fi

bcnu

The right to bear arms is a natural, human right also known as self-defense. In the USA the 2d Amendment PROTECTS (not grants) the right against federal laws that would take away that right. Many states have similar or better provisions in their own contitutions; the right to defense of life, liberty or property, for example.

Only an ultra-right dictator would be happy with having only the government agents with guns or other weapons.

skonch01

Repeal the 2nd Amendment, then. There is a process laid out for just such a thing

Betty

Are you smokin crack? Do you really think any society will ever be"gun-less"?

deepeaceful

Absolutely NOT!.....Even some that "BARE ARMS LEGALLY" should be banned from ever having possession of fire-arms.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: