T Nation

2nd Ammendment Debate

Let’s dedicate this thread to the 2nd ammendment: The right to bear arms. From previous discussions, I could probably guess where certain posters will fall on this debate, as it tends to be split fairly evenly down party lines, but we may learn something new. Here are some questions to get the commentary started. Let’s TRY to be civil!

How do you feel about gun control?

Do you bear arms?

Why is it a right?

Why is it an important right?

Would crime be reduced if guns were banished?

Does the possession of a firearm really make you safer?

What requirements should there be for one to obtain a firearm?

Please post other good questions…

Without much fanfare I’ll start by responding to the questions.

  1. Gun Control should eb in place but very limited. A legitimate, real-time database check would be the best bet. If you have committed a violent crime against society your rights just disappear.
  2. It is anyone’s right to defend themselves against agression.
  3. All rights are important. Period. This question reminds me of the big sin vs. little sin debate. The constitution could be written in one sentence: Government shall pass no laws that intrude on the rights of individuals.
  4. Crime goes up when guns are banished. Check the statistics. It’s happenned over and over.
  5. Yes. Me and my .45 stopped a carjacking 5 years ago that a cell phone probably could not have prevented. The fact that it was broad daylight tells me being witnessed did not discourage these men, but the sight of a loaded Colt made them bolt.
  6. Does this really matter. I can look in hte paper to find dozens of guns being sold by individuals, most of whom are not going to impose a waitin gperiod or background check. And these are the legal guns for sale…
    Question for those who would like to see guns outlawed: Do you really think any government can legislate a perfect society?

I just wanna chime in and show total agreement with gregbrock.

Guns reduce crime by simply being a deterrent.

People think twice when they see someone brandishing a .45 .

I honestly don’t want to put so much effort and emotion into a post, maybe I will later, but let’s just say that I support the right to bear arms and believe that banning guns increases, and definately doesn’t decrease, crime, but also agree with background checks.

I also hunt.

Hey RSU.

[quote]Right Side Up wrote:

How do you feel about gun control? [/quote]
It is based on irrational fear. Even if successfully eliminated from American society, you still have bow and arrows, crossbows, blowguns, as well as knives of every shape and size.

I do not own a gun. But I own a few martial arts weapons. (I love my butterfly knife.)

It originally was to keep the people from being dominated by a government.

Self defense. Let?s say there is a riot going on, and police are very distracted. What do you do if people decide it would be fun to break into your house and kill you? This kind of thing can happen. Sure it is rare, but then again I have never been shot, or shot at.

This has already been proven not to be the case. I have seen reports of crime in gun free countries where people have broken into jewelry stores with baseball bats, and beat the shit out of everybody, as well as the property to get to the merchandise.

If you are trained with it, then yes. There are a lot of people who are foolish, or ignorant of the use. This is mostly because people don’t really use guns like they used to. At one time it was normal to go hunting, so people were familiar, and trained from a young age. But now it is more rare, and guns are so unique to a child that there is more risk of danger. All of the problems with firearms are related to intelligence, not the gun itself.

The quick answer is no criminal record. But guns are very easy to obtain. Nobody buys a gun from a legitimate shop to commit a crime. I watched a news report a couple years back where they interviewed a group of inmates describing how they obtained their weapons. Not one was through a real dealer.

I fully advocate the right to bear armas, just in case them militant Canadians like vroom decide to try and invade.

I echo a lot of Greg Brock offered.

  1. I don’t like gun control; I do favor licensing and databasing in the name of public safety. The right to own a gun comes with the responsibility to know how to use it.

  2. Yes.

  3. Self-defense is always a right. Also, firearms used to be a primary means of subsistence (hunting).

  4. A man/woman must always have the right to protect family and property. Police serve a great purpose, but they are generally involved after the fact. Crime prevention - whether that be shooting an intruder or making the intruder think twice before entering because you have a weapon - is more effective than delaing with crime post facto.

  5. Absolutely not. Guns won’t disappear if they are banished by law - they’ll only disappear from law-abiding citizens’ hands. Criminals will still get them and then they will have the monopoly of force.

  6. Possession makes you safer, no question. The weak get targeted; if you have a weapon, you’re not as weak.

  7. A written test, demonstration of good civil behavior, no delinquent taxes.

Further questions, if outlawing guns actually decreased gun-related crimes, then why not outlaw every conceivable object used in furtherance of a crime (water, knives, computers, nylon rope, two-by-fours, gasoline, etc.)?

I do not support Gun Control.

I think the right of self defense is a basic right not to be regulated by goverment.

The right to bear arms insures all of our other rights much the same way a strong military insures our collective liberty.

I think the illegal carrying of weapons ought to be strictly enforced. I think weapons used in the commission of a crime ought to add years to your sentence.

I think GregBrock made excellent points. I am pretty much in line with his viewpoint. I have grown up with firearms shooting and hunting since about the age of seven. I hold my right to keep and bear arms very seriously! Also in the rare occurence someone did break into my home I like the fact that I would have more then a fair chance in defending myself!

Interesting. So far everyone seems to agree.

Anyone out there disagree?

Can anyone put forth other questions that are crucial to the debate?

Here’s a question:

Would you prefer EVERYONE to own a gun or NO ONE to own a gun?

My opinion is that you don’t get to pick and choose which constitutional rights are ‘good.’ The whole point behind constitutional rights is that they are supposed to be protected from the whims of the government.

My opinion is that you don’t get to pick and choose which constitutional rights are ‘good.’ The whole point behind constitutional rights is that they are supposed to be protected from the whims of the government and its citizens.

One of thunderbolt’s points needs to be highlighted so everyone can undestand the importance of this…

5. Absolutely not. Guns won’t disappear if they are banished by law - they’ll only disappear from law-abiding citizens’ hands. Criminals will still get them and then they will have the monopoly of force.

Just good to see other people out there realize this.

Slimjim, that’s too funny!

Not that anybody cares, but I like the original purpose for allowing the public the right to bear arms. Keeping the government in check is a great idea, by making sure it knows that the public can simply rise up and eliminate it if it stops representing the will of the people.

I think the world has gotten a little more complex than the forefathers were able to envision. They were only human after all, no need to turn them into dieties either.

I would prefer everybody own a gun. If nobody owned a gun, then any despot could come in and enslave everybody.

To paraphrase an old saying, a person with a gun is a citizen, a person denied a gun is a slave.


I see where you’re getting at with that question, but fact is, its just silly.

But I’ll play anyways, I would rather everyone own a gun, than no one.

I think you’d be really surprised just how many people DO carry guns. Many people you think are straight-and-narrow and rather "sheep"like carry guns. Especially here in the South…heh.

And here’s something to think about: generaly criminals or other people who give half a rat’s ass about laws and regulations will use firearms or carry them illegally or inappropriately. If they know there is a very very small chance that anyone else around them has a gun, and they feel like starting shit, they know they won’t get much resistance. But, if in the back of their mind, they know they’re not alone , it might just be enough to deter them. If they DON’T know, well good, they’ll prolly get shot tryin to pull something stupid, and either die, or learn their lesson.

Same thing for the guns allowed in bars in Arizona (I think that’s the place.) There’s people who already carry guns in bars illegally. Let’s not delude ourselves here by thinking there isn’t. Everyone wants to go ape-shit by saying “GUNS AND ALCOHOL OH MY!!” but what they fail to realize is that this levels the playing field for your “good guys” and all the “bad guys” in the bar now know that if they pull anything they’re gonna have about 30 other barrels pointed at em. I do feel that there will be a few drunken deaths that come of this, but I think they will be few enough to justify making some of these bars safer to be in.

Sorry to get off topic.

I notice a lot of agreement so I’ll throw in some less harmonious opinions

How do you feel about gun control?
Gun control is a necessity in a civilized society. I realize that ‘bad’ people will find a way to get illegal guns if they are determined. However the easier it is to get a gun, the more likely it is that they can fall into the wrong hands.
Gun control IMO does not mean that no one can own a gun. It means that there are restrictions placed on gun ownership.
I don’t think that automatic weapons, grenade launchers, etc are needed for self-protection. Who in their right mind needs an M-16 or uzi, etc.???
Owning a gun is not just a right but a responsibility. Training in gun safety should be required.
Ownership should be regulated. Just as I wouldn’t feel safe if retarded people or mentally ill people were allowed to drive, they also shouldn’t be walking around with guns.
I think society should set the rules rather than gun companies whose motive is primarily profit.
I also think police would have an easier job if they knew they weren’t outgunned.

Do you bear arms?
no, I choose not to.

Why is it a right?
The 2nd amendment states:
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.

This amendment was a direct response to Britain’s desire for the colonies to remain unarmed and unable to oppose their rule.
It is ambiguous as to whether this applies to individuals or state militia groups.
But in reality we all agree that gun ownership by individuals is allowed. It is the restrictions that are argued over.

Why is it an important right?
not sure it is. but if we are to unarm, it would be difficult to do that without becoming more vulnerable to those with illegal guns.

Would crime be reduced if guns were banished?
crimes of passion probably, but guns are not the source of crime.

Does the possession of a firearm really make you safer?
It cuts both ways - it could save your life. It could also escalate a disagreement into a deadly incident.
Imagine a NYC where everyone had a Colt 45 in a holster on their hip. Everyone! Clearly muggings would decrease. But how many lunatics would snap over some incidental thing and start shooting? how would you react to someone bumping into you?
I don’t think a fully armed camp like that would be the ideal solution for a safe city.

What requirements should there be for one to obtain a firearm?
Gun safety training. A legitimate use for the weapon, ie, hunting, self-protection, hobby, etc.
A generally responsible person - background check. no violent criminal record.
A minimum age, like a driver’s permit.

You have no idea how much this is going to pain me, but I whole-heartedly agree with Vroom AND Elk.

The right to keep and bear arms is a guard against an overly oppressive government. I also think that the 2nd amendment has protected our shores from an outright invasion from other countries.

I don’t own any firearms. But I think it should be the right of the individual to decide whether or not to own them.

Speaking to RSU’s request for other questions - Should the Federal Gov’t be allowed regulate the types of ammo that can be purchased?

They’ve already started this to some degree - Is there a greater danger to society if we use hollow points versus less ‘aggressive ammo’? I’m showing my ignorance here but I hope the intent is discernable.

Major Dan brings up some excellent points. Being a hunter I agree there is no reason someone would need an AK-47 or Uzi. Weapons like that are for the sole purpose of taking down humans in large numbers. Another thing not every person out there possesses the maturity are intelligence to responsibly own a firearm. There do need to be some checks and balances.

Don’t worry Rainjack we are going to give you mild doses of logic until we think your ready for the complete overhaul! Just kidding dude, the beginning of your post made me laugh!