The Second Amendment

[Ostronopolis]

So do you think that people should be allowed to bear arms, or do you think it should be reserved for the military and police?

[Chumblywumbly]

I think everybody should have the right to arm bears.

[Conserative Morality]

If it gets restricted to the military and police, than the government will have QUITE the measure of control.

And plus, it doesn't keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

[Maurepas]

I think everybody should have the right to arm bears.

Idk....*thinks of Bears with bombs or machine guns strapped to them being let loose in populated areas*....

[The Romulan Republic]

To the question as worded in the poll? No. Not everyone should have the right to bear arms. The mentally disturbed, violent criminals, and children come to mind.

As for the "right to bear arms," it certainly need not apply to everyone. I don't have a copy of the actual text on hand, but I don't think it reads "the unlimited right for anyone, anywhere to possess or use an unlimited number of guns, of any kind."

[Conserative Morality]

To the question as worded in the poll? No. Not everyone should have the right to bear arms. The mentally disturbed, violent criminals, and children come to mind.

As for the "right to bear arms," it certainly need not apply to everyone. I don't have a copy of the actual text on hand, but I don't think it reads "the unlimited right for anyone, anywhere to possess or use an unlimited number of guns, of any kind."

If it's between everyone having the right, or just the government and police, which would you choose?

[Ifreann]

Guns are very dangerous tools. A person's right to own one should be contingent on their ability and intention to use it safely.

[Baycosa]

If everyone has guns, don't we have equal power?

[Dumb Ideologies]

And plus, it doesn't keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

But a right to bear arms makes it easier for your average low-grade wannabe criminal to get a gun...

[Trippoli]

There should be a larger tax on Assault Rifles and other large weapons, but at the same time let them own them.

[Grays Harbor]

To the question as worded in the poll? No. Not everyone should have the right to bear arms. The mentally disturbed, violent criminals, and children come to mind.

As for the "right to bear arms," it certainly need not apply to everyone. I don't have a copy of the actual text on hand, but I don't think it reads "the unlimited right for anyone, anywhere to possess or use an unlimited number of guns, of any kind."

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.

The mentally disturbed and convicted felons already are barred from possessing firearms by Federal law.

[Baycosa]

Guns are very dangerous tools. A person's right to own one should be contingent on their ability and intention to use it safely.

Of course, but so are knives, cars and fatty food.

More people die because of traffic violators, drunk drivers or people who simply are lunatics.
Should we ban cars?

[Baycosa]

And plus, it doesn't keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

But a right to bear arms makes it easier for your average low-grade wannabe criminal to get a gun...

Not if the guns are kept under check, legal guns are almost never used in crimes because they can be traced.

[Grays Harbor]

Should we ban cars?

depends on whether you listen to the "green" lobby

[The Cat-Tribe]

To the question as worded in the poll? No. Not everyone should have the right to bear arms. The mentally disturbed, violent criminals, and children come to mind.

As for the "right to bear arms," it certainly need not apply to everyone. I don't have a copy of the actual text on hand, but I don't think it reads "the unlimited right for anyone, anywhere to possess or use an unlimited number of guns, of any kind."

If it's between everyone having the right, or just the government and police, which would you choose?

Why should we answer a ridiculous hypothetical?

Should everyone have the right to murder, or just the government and police?

As The Romulan Republic correctly stated, the right to bear arms is a valuable but not absolute right.

[JuNii]

So do you think that people should be allowed to bear arms, or do you think it should be reserved for the military and police?

what have you got against Tank tops?

I support the right to have weapons. but I also support the necessity to have training in using such weapons.

[Baycosa]

There should be a larger tax on Assault Rifles and other large weapons, but at the same time let them own them.

I agree, then only those who are serious owners can get them not just those "The AK iz kool" freaks.

[The Romulan Republic]

If it gets restricted to the military and police, than the government will have QUITE the measure of control.

And plus, it doesn't keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

Oh please.

If it became nessissary to overthrow the government by force, then

a) we will already have failed in our duty as citizens of a democracy in letting things reach that point, and

b) we can always get black market guns, get them from foreign backers, or improvise weapons.

c) Even if every citizen owned an automatic rifle, I'm not sure how much difference it would make. The government still has the tanks, artillery, and stealth bombers. Thanks to Bill Mahr for pointing this out, and while I don't always agree with the PETA-loving bastard, he kind of has a point here.

d) I question weather so many conservatives so willingly give up freedoms of various kinds because the Right to Bear Arms allows them to delude themselves into thinking that they're free as long as they can still shoot the Feds if they want to. I also wonder who thinks this is a good social attitude to encourage.

[Vilmaria]

And plus, it doesn't keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

But a right to bear arms makes it easier for your average low-grade wannabe criminal to get a gun...

and it makes it much easier for you to shoot him if he tries to use that thing.

[JuNii]

As The Romulan Republic correctly stated, the right to bear arms is a valuable but not absolute right.

and if I may add...

it's a right that comes with ALOT of Responsibility!

[The Cat-Tribe]

Guns are very dangerous tools. A person's right to own one should be contingent on their ability and intention to use it safely.

Of course, but so are knives, cars and fatty food.

More people die because of traffic violators, drunk drivers or people who simply are lunatics.
Should we ban cars?

Um. The privilege of driving a vehicle IS contingent on compliance with requirements meant to increase the likelihood and intention of using it safely. Bad example, padawan.

[Saint Clair Island]

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 agree with this sentiment. While the existence of a police and military means that citizens should not be required to keep and bear arms, it does mean that they should have the right to maintain them (especially if they have served in the military) in case of foreign invasion or civil unrest.

I also support the right of people to own firearms for sport or home defense, although I don't see the appeal in the former and the logic in the latter, simply because it makes them feel better -- and happy people are more likely to support their community in difficult times, after all.

[Baycosa]

Should we ban cars?

depends on whether you listen to the "green" lobby

Ok, let's say fatty food.

More people die for clogged arteries then smoking, alcohol and guns put togheter. Why don't the ATF change name to FATF Fattie Alcohol Tobacco Firearms.

[Sorgan]

Guns are very dangerous tools. A person's right to own one should be contingent on their ability and intention to use it safely.

Of course, but so are knives, cars and fatty food.

More people die because of traffic violators, drunk drivers or people who simply are lunatics.
Should we ban cars?

That what my nation did.

[Ifreann]

If everyone has guns, don't we have equal power?

No. How many guns do you think Barack Obama has? Yet he's the commander in chief of a huge military.

Guns are very dangerous tools. A person's right to own one should be contingent on their ability and intention to use it safely.

Of course, but so are knives, cars and fatty food.

Fatty food is not a tool. And knives are less dangerous than guns.

More people die because of traffic violators, drunk drivers or people who simply are lunatics.
Should we ban cars?

Of course not. Why would you even ask me that?