I know we're all different thinkers, but I'm just curious if there is a consensus view among atheists regarding firearms?

Views: 303

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Atheists definitely need guns,intellectual and literal, but only for self-defense against psychopathic, machine-gun wielding religious fundamentalists.
Im not sure if its stated in the Koran or Bible but there's a verse somewhere in those archaic canons that promises 'glorious rewards' here on earth or in the imaginary afterlife to any believer who slaughters non-believers in the name of religion.
If you want freedom of expression, prepare for war!
Im a firm supporter of the right to bear arms. But I also support sensible gun laws.
That's pretty much where I fall on the issue.
The second amendment is a conditional right rather than an inherent right. "A well regulated militia (as defined by Article 1 sec 8 - powers of Congress.) being necessary to a free state....", is the conditional.
I do, however, support the right to maintain firearms with the exception of handguns, without special permits - which most crimes are committed with; and assault weapons that have no legitimate civilian use. As I was around shotguns and rifles used for hunting all my life and during college hunting supplemented my diet I support the right to maintain firearms for that purpose.
As for the defence of my home and family a shotgun is a much more effective defense that a handgun - loaded with birdshot it's not usually fatal but very incapacitating.
"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."

Shall not be infringed. Gun laws only serve to infringe upon your right to keep and bear arms. Also, there is no such thing as an "Assault Weapon" It's either bolt action, semiautomatic, selectable fire, or fully automatic. "Assault Weapon" is a scare tactic used to take your constitutional rights away. I don't think it's a coincidence violent crime is down since the sunset of the "Assault Weapon" ban.
You do know what a militia is right?
Yes, it's a citizen army essentially. The founding fathers fully intended to keep the citizenry just as well armed as the government.
Do you know what a citizen army is? It's called a police force. Besides, no matter how you interpret the second amendment, regulation is a good thing.
The main reason I support the right to bear arms is because you can't expect the police to always protect you. There have even been cases where the police were negligent in responding to emergency calls, and the verdict was that police are not under any obligation to protect people.

The first amendment has stipulations, and I don't see what's wrong with the 2nd amendment having them, too--but certainly people should have the right to protect their own home.
I agree. I personally wouldn't own a gun even to protect myself. There are other ways of doing that. I still remember a story of someone breaking in to the home of a Green Bay Packer . The Packer took a bed post and sent the intruder into next week with it. :)

Same here. I'm scared to go anywhere near a gun in case there's an accident...or in case I suddenly have a case of temporary insanity and impulsively shoot someone.

I consider the National Guard to fit the mold for militia the best.  You know what with the Commander in Chief being in charge of them as mentioned in the US Constitution.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Guard_of_the_United_States#Co...

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

AJY

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service