Is gun control a good idea and is it legal under the Constitution?

We need gun control in moderation. If we just left it at "the right to bear arms should not be infringed" then any crackhead could get a nuclear warhead and aim it anywhere. IMO concealed weapons are a good idea as long as the applicant goes through a background check and a safety course, and as far as i know all states do this so it is a good program. The assult weapons ban was total crap, glad to see it expire. It did nothing other than outlaw firearms based on their looks and not functionality and did absolutley nothing to prevent crime.
I do however fully support background checks for anyone buying a new gun, a convicted felon shouldn't be able to walk in to your friendly neighborhood Wal-Mart and pick up a firearm. Overall i think we have too much gun control in this country but it isn't anywhere near as bad as Canada or the UK.

A nuclear warhead is a bomb, not an arm. I think that leaving it at "the right to bear guns and swords" is good enough for me.

Who was it that said that we should let anyone who wanted a gun have one, but make the ammunition extremely expensive?

Chris Rock. Bullets should cost $10,000! then you wouldn't have fatalities of innocent bystanders. For $10000, you dont miss. and if someone is found with six bullet wounds, he probably deserved it, you can buy a very high quality car with that money.

Rock aside, I am in full support of gun control.
People are stupid. Therefore, people with guns are stupid.
Stupid people do stupid things. Therefore, people with guns do stupid things.
Killing people is stupid. Therefore, people with guns may kill each people.

Background check or no, civilians should not have guns. Hunt with bows. Protect yourself with a taser. If someone breaks into your house, you dont need a gun, because they wont have a gun. No guns for civilians. Less people die.

Although I mostly agree with you, I couldn't pass this up.

1. Not all people are stupid.
2. Not all people with guns are stupid people.
3. People with guns may kill each people?

No offense, of course, Phil.



I know this is bumper-sticker mentality, but I think it holds true here. If "civilians" are denied access to guns, then law-abiding civilians will not have guns. Law-breaking civilians will find ways to get guns.

I believe that a proficient National Background Check System (such as the NICS) is the answer.

That's all...

Carl
__________

You are a dumbass.

Take away all legal guns and you still have hundreds of thousands of illegial guns floating around on the black market and in the hands of criminals. If gun control works so well than why do we still have violent crime commited with guns owned by criminals? Who would you rather have in possession of all the guns, your average law-abiding citizen or a violent criminal who will steal and murder much easier when he is the only one armed? Yeah, sure the world would be great if we destroyed ALL guns but that is NOT going to happen because it is impossible. It seems pretty obvious to me that you have proably never shot a gun, been around a gun, or have any friends that hunt or shoot.

I nominate this for the most retarded post ever. Seriously.

Unless you're just that good at sarcasm.

Gun control is hitting your target

Phil, where do you live? Please post your home address so the proper people can pay you a visit some evening. We know you don't have a gun, so your house would be the logical place to target.

You do know the reason we have a 2nd Amendment don't you? Hint: it has nothing to do with hunting. It is there so the people have the means to take back control of their government if the need arises. Did you know you are a member of the militia unless you are a female or like 80 years old? Well, you are. You are supposed to have a weapon of the type in current use by the military. That means we should all have M16A2's/M4's, read full-automatic weapons!

If you want to protect yourself with a Taser, by all means, go ahead. Just don't bring a Taser to a gunfight.

I was in favor of fairly strong gun control until about a couple of years ago. Then the RIAA/MPAA/BSA went on their anti-technology binge that continues today. I realized it was stupid to make things or technologies that can be readily acquired illegal (guns, drugs, DeCSS, all easily acquired by ordinary people for personal use in America; nuclear weapons, not easy for ordinary people to acquire for personal use in America).

Also, John Asscroft really creeped me out as AGOTUS.

Yes... but I'm afraid that the new guy Gonzales will be worse - he is as anti-privacy as ol' Johnny Ashcroft, but he's anti-gun too.

I actually have shot a gun, in fact, I have my Rifle Shooting Merit Badge. I still prefer archery by far, but I do know how to shoot.



22219 North Lake Village Dr. Katy, TX. 77450.

...I believe in civilian gun control...my father doesnt, good luck on that one.
oh, and advocating armed robery...i'm so glad that we have great people in this country like you to "protect" us. you suck.



Well, then you can be a crazy psycho and go shoot up govt. buildings whenever you please. Dont let me stand in your way . And just try to force me to join your 'militia'. Unless you plan to hold me at gunpoint...




Perhaps the real problem is the existence of said gunfights.

You're a male citizen of the United States. You're already in it.

Yeah, you be the one to go up to the thugs and tell them not to start gunfights. You walk up to a gangbanger and tell him not to start shooting. Waltz right into Iran and tell Osama that he'd better only plan bombing attacks because you think he shouldn't start gunfights. You confront a crazy man on meth and tell him not to start a gunfight. You tell the guys at Columbine not to start a gunfight.

Now that THAT is settled, we only have to worry about big strong criminals, or groups of criminals. Are you going to tell them not to mug people smaller than them? Not to gang up on people to mug them? Rapists can only rape women smaller than them, right?

You're not willing to do that? You don't think they'd listen to you? You mean... if you told criminals, gang-bangers, muggers, rapists, terrorists, and crazed gunmen not to start gunfights... they would IGNORE you? Guess what... if they ignore the laws against stealing, robbing, murdering, raping, and crashing jetliners into buildings, then JUST MAYBE they will ignore any laws you make about not having a gun.

The police won't help you. Officer safety is paramount... and the supreme court has ruled (correctly, I might add) that police have no obligation to protect any citizen. Even if they wanted to help, you'd have to pull out your phone, dial 911, tell them where you are... and then, if you're dealing with a slow criminal who hasn't killed you yet, you get to bleed out while listening to the 911 operator saying "stay calm..."

Guess what! Law abiding citizens don't start gunfights. And law abiding citizens are the only ones who are going to obey laws about not having a gun. I would think that someone at UMR would be able to grasp the logic of that statement. Do all of us a favor and move to europe with the rest of the socialists.