The right to own a firearm

You should be able to have firearms, but nothing above what is reasonable. Flamethrowers, bazookas, machine guns, uzis, and the like are right out. I really don't mess with guns anyway, and I don't have problems with criminals with guns, so...yeah. I guess it's okay to have a gun or two, if you must have one.

(save me Reed Lover!...succumbing...to...republican...values......ackk.... ......)

With ownership, comes responsibility.

The reason for the 2nd amendment is to allow civilians to form a militia if the government became a dictatorship. Whoever controls the military could then control the populace.

Sure, the 2nd amendment gets taken to extremes. Many people who own guns, shouldn't be allowed to and many types of weapons should not be privately owned.

Personally, I'd rather have weapons only in the hands of those who are sworn to protect....

I agree that it doesn't really matter.. those who want to kill will find a gun somewhere... or use other methods.. its not the vehicle we should be questioning, but the lack of responsibility that we feel towards each other.

Emidar.. that 12 year old could just as easily of picked up a kitchen knife and plunged it thru her mother's heart... it would have had the same effect.

Its why I have such a problem with the "Bowling for Columbine" crap that Michael Moore put out.  Instead of using controversy to play up whether Walmart should be selling bullits or whether or not Charleston Heston is senile... he should of been dealing with the shooters upbringing... where the heck their parents where.. and maybe hold them a little more responsible for what eventually happened.  Cause I understand those kids had already been in trouble a few times and the parents did nothing...

threefates wrote: I agree that it doesn't really matter.. those who want to kill will find a gun somewhere... or use other methods.. its not the vehicle we should be questioning, but the lack of responsibility that we feel towards each other. Emidar.. that 12 year old could just as easily of picked up a kitchen knife and plunged it thru her mother's heart... it would have had the same effect. Its why I have such a problem with the "Bowling for Columbine" crap that Michael Moore put out.  Instead of using controversy to play up whether Walmart should be selling bullits or whether or not Charleston Heston is senile... he should of been dealing with the shooters upbringing... where the heck their parents where.. and maybe hold them a little more responsible for what eventually happened.  Cause I understand those kids had already been in trouble a few times and the parents did nothing...

I agree with almost all of that except one thing.  Even the most Selfless, caring  parent can have a kid snap.  It happens all the time. I can understand a real neglectful situation but what about the parents that work hard, do all the "right" things and still their child flips out like that. What are they being held responsible for?  For all of our knowledge we don't know why that happens. Is it psychological? If the child is seeing a doctor for any illness or anger problems what are the parents supposed to do?  sociological? Is this the environment provided at home or school?  Should not the educators also be held responsible?   Or just a momentary lapse of reason?  Who then is responsible?  Taking the guns away as you said is not going to change this scenario but I can't see making an already responsible parent more responsible. You might has well said they committed the act.   In the end we are never really safe from anything not even our own families.  No government no church or any other organization will change that fact.

threefates wrote:   Emidar.. that 12 year old could just as easily of picked up a kitchen knife and plunged it thru her mother's heart... it would have had the same effect.

What a pathetic statement 3'. Let's give kids hand grenades then, after all, they could just as easily make molatoff cocktails if they wanted. Why not save them the trouble?

As for "guns don't kill people, people do", it's like saying cigarettes don't kill you, smoking them does. Cigarettes are made to smoke, handguns to kill people. It doesn't take much imagination to work out why America has such a gun crime problem.

Have a good look at the statistics. Let's put it like this shall we, in the last 24 years 50 police officers have been killed in Britain in the line of duty. How many of their American collegues have been shot in the last 24 years? Danbo, I'd be surprised if you told me it was less, even taking the population difference into account (UK= +/- 60,000,000). The whole gun culture is allien to me, thank god, and I wouldn't thank you for it.

Whenever Americans start talking about their right to bare arms, most of us Brits start thinking "paranoid survivalist redneck ultrarightwing gun toting KKK psychopath", but I suppose it's easy for us to judge, our neighbours don't own guns either so we don't feel the need to arm ourselves. I think you guys may have got your chickens confused with your eggs, and the order in which they come. 

danbo wrote: Stop throw generalized stones, they hurt. I believe I said guns should only be in the hands of those sworn to protect. Please don't think that every American is a That is totally absurd. As in any political issue, there are extremes. Usually those in the extreme are a minority, who happen to get the majority of media coverage. Most American streets are pretty safe. Some much safer then in the past. When you consolidate the days happenings in a country that covers hundreds of thousands of square miles with a population of nearly 300 million people into half hour news segments, it appears to be a very violent place. I have had fellow officers shot at, one killed and a few who had to pull the trigger themselves. I would love to see guns disappear. I wish I had to find a different profession because mine is no longer necessary. However, I live in the here and now and deal with it. Just for info: recovered weapons that are not evidence, are destroyed.

Danbo man, sorry if you misunderstood me, I wasn't aiming stones at you, and agree that guns should not be available to the general public. I know full well that all Americans are not "survivalist redneck gun toting KKK pychopath." Thats just the way it appears to people who manage to live their entire lives without ever seeing a hand gun except for in films or on TV. Seeing you all calmly debating the rights of every knuckle dragging individual in Hicksville to own enough firepower to take out a small primary school scares me. The responsible among us should be prepared to do without guns so that the irresponsible can't own them either.

p.s. it's only my opinion, what do I know anyway?

emdiar wrote: threefates wrote: Emidar.. that 12 year old could just as easily of picked up a kitchen knife and plunged it thru her mother's heart... it would have had the same effect. What a pathetic statement 3'. Let's give kids hand grenades then, after all, they could just as easily make molatoff cocktails if they wanted. Why not save them the trouble?

Sorry but I don't get the connection emidar... we don't generally have molatoff cocktails in our kitchens.. but a kitchen knife is in the home of nearly every family... not just in America either... What I was saying, is that if someone wants to kill, the vehicle they use is unimportant.  I don't see how that is pathetic.

emdiar wrote: As for "guns don't kill people, people do", it's like saying cigarettes don't kill you, smoking them does. Cigarettes are made to smoke, handguns to kill people.

Don't get this logic either.  Drugs are natural or created to help people, yet more people die of drug related incidents in this country, than by guns...a year.  Cigarettes may be made to smoke, but if its your choice to smoke them knowing full well the effects... then the responsibility is not on the cigarettes...

And that gun-toting KKK psyhcopath issue.. I'm sure Danbo has covered...