Right to Bear Arms. Bad idea?

Question

Right to Bear Arms. Bad idea?

Answer 1

“The law is perfectly well settled that the first ten amendments to the Constitution, commonly known as the "Bill of Rights," were not intended to lay down any novel principles of government, but simply to embody certain guaranties and immunities which we had inherited from our English ancestors, and which had, from time immemorial, been subject to certain well recognized exceptions arising from the necessities of the case. In incorporating these principles into the fundamental law, there was no intention of disregarding the exceptions, which continued to be recognized as if they had been formally expressed. Thus, the freedom of speech and of the press (Art. I) does not permit the publication of libels, blasphemous or indecent articles, or other publications injurious to public morals or private reputation; the right of the people to keep and bear arms (Art. II) is not infringed by laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons

Answer 2

Few topics bring out the passion in people like the right to Bear Arms. There are other topics, but that was not part of the question. We are granted the right to bear arms. The world we live in is different today then when the Founding Fathers framed the Constitution. However, no the right to Bear Arms is not a bad idea any more so then the Right to Vote or the Right to Free Speech. There are those that I think it is a bad idea to be allowed to vote and a bad idea to be able to express their views. However it is their right to do so as is the right to Bear Arms.

Answer 3

I'll make this short and sweet.



The right to bear arms is a good idea because of this simple fact.



The people who will legaly buy/own/shoot a firearm in the United States are 99% of the time going to use said firearm for recreation, defence, or both. If you take away this right, the only people it will affect are the people who are not going to use the weapon unless provoked into a situation.



Criminals will ALWASY be able to buy weapons. And they will ALWAYS Carry them. Through black markets, ect. If you say the goverment can stop illegal firearm sales, think again. Look at the Millions if not Billions of dollars in Illegal Drugs coming in through the borders every week! Now imagine the Drug Runners getting a new business. Supplying criminals with guns?!? Scarry though huh?



Final though. If criminals know that the majority of law abiding citizens no longer have firearms to protect themselves. Where is the uncertanity and fear going to be in them that might have kept them from attempting to rob/assault/rape said person?



The police and law enforcment uphold the law, but are not our personal defenders. It is up to the person to protect themselves, their property, and their loved ones from immediate harm and let Law Enforcment sort it out when they arive.



I own several firearms. All locked up in a fireproof gun safe, unloaded. Except for the .9mm I keep by my bed at night. And I am not a member of the NRA, I just believe in protecting my family.

Answer 4

No, the right to bear arms is the best idea, and perhaps the most important of all our rights.



it's the one thing that keeps us from being fearful of a police state where the few in power can control and enslave the entire population.



And yes, it means that PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS have the right to keep and bear arms, not just the military. (just the same as the right to free speech is for individuals, not the military only)

Answer 5

If it was a bad idea, we would still be a British colony.

The right was enumerated in the Constitution not as a right to defend oneself from someone else, but to defend ones self from the government.

Either way, it is an excellent idea. The first thing the government does is take away the citizens means of defense (Germany, Russia, and others), then becomes the master rather than the servant.

Answer 6

"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."



I had to call the police for a emergency last year. It took them 4 hours to get to my home. Guess what he told me when he got there. "Get a gun and take care of it yourself" I already knew that but I still thought it would be a good idea to call the police.



I use to live in town and had all kinds of trouble. Had someone to break in before held him at gun point until the police got there. The cop told me "You should have shot him."



Had dogs coming in the yard causing all kinds of trouble the officer told me "shoot them".



Had possums getting in the trash the cop again said "shoot it".



Had the neighbors kids stealing my news paper. I was afraid to call the police that time. No telling what he might say. lol

Answer 7

2nd Amendment: 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.



Point Number 1: Well regulated Meant that the person was capable of proper firearms use.

Point Number 2: Necessary for the security of a FREE state imply that the use thereof may be necessary to Keep the state FREE, from tyrants or intruders.

Point Number 3: THE PEOPLE. Not the military not the Nasty Guard (which did not exist when this was written) are the recipients of this Right.

Point Number 4: Shall Not be infringed. The government is continually attempting to distress this portion of the Amendment.



In order to maintain a free and safe country (state) the people of this country must be given the opportunity to protect themselves, their families and their community against the threat of Government excesses, criminal assaults and foreign invasion.

For those of you who are not 'up on the news' the courts have already 'Decreed' that the State has no OBLIGATION toward the protection of any person in the state. So, if it is not their obligation to provide the service that they tax us for then they Cannot deny ANY PERSON the right to provide for their own protection.



My complments to LUNATIC, you have done well in choosing your name...

Answer 8

>>Right to Bear Arms. Bad idea<<



The men who penned those words did not include any "bad ideas"



As of 12/17/2004 the US Attorney General, & the DOJ's OLC. Decided that those men actually did mean what they said. "shocker"

http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.pdf

Answer 9

My right to live outweighs someone else's right to kill me.



If I am a kill or be killed sutuation, I plan to not die.



To that end, any tool at my disposal is right for me to posess.



Lunatic Writes "Today? How much protection does owning/carrying a firearm really afford? Guns are much better offensive weapons than they are defensive unless you are in a known combat situation."



They are great defensive weapons. Simply showing that you have one and are ready to use it sends many criminals running. USDOJ did some surveys and came up with the figure that 2 million times per year someone uses a gun to defend themselves, and 20% of those people believed that had they not had a gun they would have been killed



"As far as owning firearms to keep the government "in-line", what kind of influence would several thousand pistol wielding citizens really have over a president who is commander-in-chief of the most powerful military in the world complete with fighter aircraft, tanks, artillery etc.?"



If you know the government is coming to collect you and kill you without trial, then why not take out a few of them with you. If that is a real threat, then the actual soldiers will be much more reluctant to come and collect whoever the government hates.



Here's a snippet from a book written by a guy the Russian Government threw in jail for doing nothing. He was one of the few who survived



""And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? After all, you knew ahead of time that those bluecaps were out at night for no good purpose. And you could be sure ahead of time that you'd be cracking the skull of a cutthroat. Or what about the Black Maria sitting out there on the street with one lonely chauffeur? What if it had been driven off or its tires spiked? The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!"



--Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn, Gulag Archipelago, the story of the 60 million Russians who suffered, and the 20 million who died in Soviet slave labor camps.





Mr Danger has two "cases" I would like to address

"Case in point 1

Law abiding Joe...gets home he discovers that Mrs JSP has a boyfriend... Mr.JSP kills

Until that round hits Mrs JSP, Mr JSP has never done anything criminal in his life "



First, the gun doesn't make it easier for JSP to kill. That is all JSP. If he didn't use a gun, he'd use the chainsaw, kitchen knife, golf club sitting right there by the bed.



Second, the number of people who commit murder and have absolutely no criminal record is astronomically small. You have a better chance of being killed from objects falling off commercial jets than you do of being murdered by someone with no criminal record.



"I would venture a guess" Mr Danger, I would venture a guess that you have not studied the crime statistics much at all.



"Case in point 2 ...a bunch a gang bangers decide to have gun fight in the middle of the street ...How does the right to bear arms allow the gang banger crazies to have such easy access to that many weapons "



#1 Innocent until proven guilty, until someone is convicted of a crime, or thrown in the nut bin by a judge, you have all your rights. That's just the way the system works. I'd rather not have those guys vote, have freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, etc etc, but that's how it works



#2 If they are gang bangers, they have criminal records. If they are criminals, it is illegal for them to have guns. It is illogical to enact laws on the law abiding citizenry to control the law breaking minority.



#3 this is also why citizens need guns, because the cops cannot stop gangbangers all the time.

Answer 10

With or Without the 2nd Amendment every person has a God given right and responsibility to protect themselves and others from becoming a VICTIM.* GUNS have become what use to be the cave man's club to defend ourselves and others if necessary.* " Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the people's Liberty's Teeth".*>George Washington.* " Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is Force, like Fire, it is a Dangerous Servant and a Fearful Master".> George Washington.* " If the Freedom of Speech is taken away then Dumb and Silent we may be led, like Sheep to the SLAUGHTER".*> George Washington.* " NO Free man Shall Ever Be Disbarred from Owning His GUN".*> Thomas Jefferson.* " I would rather Die on my Feet, than Live on my Knees".*> ME.*

Answer 11

I don't believe the right to bear arms is a bad idea at all, and I'd be happy to tell you why.



First, consider that the police aren't able - or even responsible, according to numerous court rulings - to protect you from a crime. Although I believe in court reform, education reform, prison reform, social programs to reduce crime and everything else along those lines, the reality is that, if someone has decided they are going to commit a crime against you or your family, the only person who can prevent that from happening - who can choose to not be a victim - is you. The police can, at best, investigate the crime and do the paperwork after it's all over. Whether or not they catch the offender is of little concern to you if you are now dead or your family has been raped. As the saying goes, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.



In America today, there is a great sense of entitlement - everyone expects the government to protect them, provide for them, etc. After Katrina, so many victims of that tragic disaster felt that the government had let them down, and it definately had, to an extent. However, I believe that the reality is that, as adults, men and women, we have a responsibility to provide for our own protection, survival, and defense, if need be. That means that, when the chips are down, if noone is around to help you, you must be prepared to take care of yourself - that's what responsibility means.



I own several firearms and take the possession and use of them very seriously. I am a peace-loving individual, and I never want to hurt anyone in my entire life. Be that as it may, if someone chooses to put me in a position where my only option is to defend myself, or even more, my family, against the threat of violence - God help them, for they have put themselves in a dangerous position indeed.



The point is, that the right to bear arms isn't about machismo, and it's not about bloodlust. Possessing the means by which to provide for the protection of your own is more than a matter of debate to me - it is a basic requirement for the defense of life, liberty and property, and every person should have the freedom to satisfy that requirement. I believe that's what the Second Amendment is all about - I believe that is the spirit of why it was written.



*EDIT - To respond to those who object that guns in the hands of criminals pose a danger to law-abiding citizens, my response is that yes, that is true, but the guns are not the problem - it is those using them for harm that are the problem. It has been said that there is a deluded state of mind that chooses to believe that making certain inanimate objects illegal will somehow affect their criminal misuse, and I couldn't agree more. Further, should the liberties of free men be determined by the good or bad behavior of criminals? Hardly! Certainly, yelling fire in a movie theater is an abuse of the right to free speech, as protected by the First Amendment. However, the appropriate response to such action is not to gag everyone who enters a theater - it is to punish those who chose to do wrong. In the same way, the threat of violence by criminals with guns who abuse Second Amendment rights should not be met by confiscating guns from law-abiding citizens, since there was nothing to fear from them to begin with (and rest assured that only law-abiding citizens will surrender their weapons, as criminals clearly have no regard for obedience to the law). Rather, gun crimes should be met with punishment of the offender. I fear that America's sense of justice has fallen far indeed if this is not clearly understood.

Answer 12

"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed and that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of press." -Thomas Jefferson

Answer 13

Regarding the Second Amendment, Charlton Heston said it best:



"It is America's First Freedom, the one right that protects all of the others. "

Answer 14

If you feel like the right to bear arms is a bad idea, That is unfortunate for you, because in America you have that right, and will continue to, whether you like it or not.



There are plenty of oppressive governments worldwide that do not allow firearms ownership. I suggest you pack up and immigrate to one of them. Preferably far away from here.



Of course, you won't have any of the other Constitutional rights you may enjoy in those countries, including the right to disagree with your government, a right you happen to be utilizing at this moment.



The second ammendment ensures that here in America we have the means to PROTECT our other Constitutional rights from elimination by government oppression. The right to own firearms was put in place by the Founding Fathers to ensure if our government BECAME oppressive, We would have arms with which to renew our freedoms. Have you ever READ the Declaration of Independence? It sets forth a mandate upon all citizens to rise up and resist oppression, with ARMS. They knew that even their new government had the potential to go bad over time, and they thus allowed us arms, and charged us with protecting the other rights they entrusted us with.



If that is too much responsibility for you, and if you have no fear of oppression, then like I say, JUST LEAVE. Venezuala is currently seeking those who hate freedom and American freedom in particular. Hugo Chavez would be glad to welcome American traitors like you, and We, as freedom loving Americans would be glad to be rid of you as well.

Answer 15

Never a bad idea. Am armed society is a polite society.



If my Government doesn't trust me with guns how can I reasonably be expected to trust my government?

Answer 16

No. Constitutional Right.

Answer 17

No, great idea! It allows people to defend themselves from criminals, and it helps prevent invasions by foreign armies. I bought a pistol for Mom to keep in her home when she was alone. How else could an old woman defend herself from slimebags that all too often prey upon the old and the weak?

Answer 18

I saw a grate show on this! Penn and tellers Bullshit! on showtime. Go to block buster and rent it. The episode is called gun controll. Watch that and lwt e know what you think.

Answer 19

its great idea to have the right to bear arms its also our right not our privledge

Answer 20

If the law-abiding citizens of America didn't have the right to bear arms, then the only ones with guns would be the criminals.

Answer 21

If you don't have the power of self-preservation and self-determination, you are simply a ward of the State, not a free person. Without a gun, you don't have that power.

Answer 22

yea it was a real dumb idea for them to allow citizens to defend themselves.... We should be like China or old Russia under communist rule where we can't do anything over an oppressive government...

Answer 23

If you don't like the constitution do not try to change it to your liking, simply move to another country where their constitution better suits your wants. Me personally, I wouldn't trade my country for any other country on the planet. USA all the way.

Answer 24

I got this off another poster yesterday, thanks whoever you are.



"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity ... will respect the less important and arbitrary ones ... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants, they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." — Thomas Jefferson

Answer 25

no the right to bear arms is a great idea

Answer 26

No, especially if you live in a rural state, like I do.

Answer 27

Criminals would love people who think like you. The streets would be a lot safer, for them to do their crimes without resistence.

Answer 28

perhaps not for the USA as you all seem so in love with the idea, and i sure am not going to judge you for it, but most civilised countries are not massively keen on the idea at all.

Answer 29

Why is it that all of your questions seem to amount to spam and trolling and nothing more?



I've heard more original material from my six year old niece, Alex.

Answer 30

Nope.

Answer 31

You must be muslim or a terrorist if you think it's a bad idea. Go crawl back into your cave and take a dump or something.

Answer 32

No, if kept for the right reason.

Answer 33

Don't get me going...My GUN my RIGHT.

Answer 34

no, protect you and yours by any means!

Answer 35

Hell No

Answer 36

No way if we ever got invaded by another country we would kick there @$$!!!

Answer 37

wujoo said it best!

Answer 38

No

Answer 39

The more important question: The right to arm bears? Bad idea? I think so.

Answer 40

NO

Answer 41

In theory No in practice Yes

The argument that if law abiding citizens don't have guns to protect themselves then they will become victims to criminals that do have guns has one huge flaw in it;It assumes that guns don't make perfectly law abiding citizens criminals

Case in point 1

Law abiding Joe Six -Pack stops by the bar for a couple of cold ones on the way home from work, when he gets home he discovers that Mrs JSP has a boyfriend , they get into it and Mr.JSP pulls out his completely legal gun and kills Mrs JSP

Until that round hits Mrs JSP, Mr JSP has never done anything criminal in his life [other than drive with a buzz on once in a while]

I would venture a guess that otherwise law abiding citizens have been killed more law abiding citizens that either live in their homes or are guests in their homes then they have killed criminals that invaded their homes

Case in point 2

I'm driving to work on the west side of Chicago

I'm stuck in traffic when a bunch a gang bangers decide to have gun fight in the middle of the street As we all know unlike NRA members gang bangers can't shoot worth a spit so there are bullets flying all over the place.Before i can get my car out of harms way it gets hit a couple of times .Luckily I don't get damaged but some of my car's upholstery takes a beating .How does the right to bear arms allow the gang banger crazies to have such easy access to that many weapons ?

Answer 42

Not at the time it was written.



Today? How much protection does owning/carrying a firearm really afford? Guns are much better offensive weapons than they are defensive unless you are in a known combat situation.



As far as owning firearms to keep the government "in-line", what kind of influence would several thousand pistol wielding citizens really have over a president who is commander-in-chief of the most powerful military in the world complete with fighter aircraft, tanks, artillery etc.?

Answer 43

If you live in an insecure country like U.S.A., then you need to protect yourself. If you live happily elsewhere, then you do not need to because nobody bothers to fight with you.

Answer 44

It is not a bad idea but we have let it get out of control so it is starting to look like a bad idea...