dear folks, I thought about this question and logicaly having guns does not really make sense. there are a couple of arguments that do not hold water
1. self defense; if i am assulting you and i have a gun pointed at you , your best bet is to not fight because what might have been just a robbery will then become a killing, yours.
if you are home and some one comes in there is a chanch you might get the drop on them or if they are already holding a gun a burglery becomes a killing 50--50 odds yours.
another problem, is if you use deadly force and the criminal is not armed you may have a legal problem
another problem, people panick and start shooting thinking I thought someone had a gun ask any military firearms instructor about the phenomona of lots of folks with guns hearing what may be a gunshot
there are lots of other reasons but the fbi files show that most folks are shot by relatives(!) or folks they know.
I think we should ban hand guns,and make the mfg / import of them illegal, make mandatory life sentence any one using a hand gun in a crime, make modification of rifles illegal, and melt every one yu get, by impounding or buying. it will take a while but the effect will be that hand guns will not be readily available if at all.
for the hunters they can still have rifles.
Yeah, the police. It is a separated statement. The text: "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." It recognizes that a police force is needed for the security of the state, at the same time the people's right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. If it stated that it was the right of the militia, it would state as such. The founding fathers just fought a war where people brought their own guns to fight the war with and realized that disarming the populace was a major necessary step to allow tyranny to happen. Nobody is stating you have to have a gun. You can't take other peoples' guns as it is their right outlined in our constitution.
please think logicaly; if i intend to use a gun for a crime i will have my gun cocked and ready. even if you have a gun and go for it i will shoot you first, then rob your body and take your gun too;, net results you have still been robbed, and i now have an extra gun. and oh by the way you are dead
but if you had given me the money you would not be dead and i would not have a second gun. and maybe you could identify me to the police.
Have you read any other parts of this discussion? Did you even read your own posts? My apologies if I'm too harsh, but over the last 10 or 12 pages we've pretty much come to a consensus from many opposite ends of the discussion~ it might behoove you to check out some of that to get a better understanding of where the debate stood, and about where it ended.
Btw I've been robbed at gunpoint~ except I had a gun too. I'm still here. Explain.