share.triangle.com - Do you think Americans should have the right to bear arms? - Comments

Right to Bear Arms?

Walter — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 08:52:48 -0400

I believe firmly in the second amendment. As a matter of fact, this writer belongs to both the NRA and the ACLU.

However, that right should be limited to arms designed for protection of one's home and belongings. One pistol per family sounds reasonable to me.

No one should be allowed to purchase machine guns, assault rifles, etc. These weapons were designed to kill the human animal and should be rigidly controled.

Thank you.

Gun Control

Canopus — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:02:12 -0400

Good knee jerk reaction. Why do all these murders usually take place in a "gun free" zone? So the killer can feel safe. And they are. It's important to realise your federal,state and local governments have no obligation to protect you as an individual. They appear many times after the fact.Our government was designed to allow people to protect themselves and their families from eminent dangers. Is it reasonable to dial 911 while your husband or wife is being beaten to death over 5 or 10 dollars in a robbery. Or could you do something to help. Let's ask the families of victims at VT. During the 20th century you were 6 times more likely to be killed by your government than in a war. Governments that had guns but not the people. First indication of a tyrannical government, wanting all the power. Your Army is controlled by your politicians. Keep your politicians in check and so will your Armies. Check out the totals for governments handy work @

http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Democide

History shows that when the

Constitutionalist — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 08:38:19 -0400

History shows that when the British invaded and conquered lands, they would first compel the people to surrender their arms. Once they relinquished their weapons, innocent people were victimized by the invaders.

Our Founders learned that the only way to stop foreign or government tyranny, was to insure citizen's right to keep weapons. During the 1770s and well into the 19th century, men typically carried swords and pistols on their persons. One reason for that was because there was no constabulary. In NYC as an example, there was no police force until well in the 1820s. Therefore, people had to have access to weapons.

One important note that has been overlooked is the term "well regulated". Contrary to today's language use, well regulated meant "well armed" or well equipped in the 1770s. The Second Amendment is there to insure that the people will be protected against invaders or government tyrants by having access to such weaponry.

about time

Visitor — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 23:58:43 -0400

two words jury nullification if you dont like a law or don't believe in the case you are sitting thru jury duty on vote not guilty this is your greatest power and you do not have to explain yourself to no one for the way you vote

Gun Control

Ray — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 18:30:51 -0400

Ask how the survivors of West Va, Tech feel?

Gun Control

Visitor — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 18:28:14 -0400

Tell it to the victims survivors of West Va. Tech and get their collective reactions.

Gun control again

Al — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 10:43:18 -0400

Gun control has killed more people in the 20th century than even religion. I have never understood why people think that making gun control laws will stop crime. Why do you think we call them criminals, because they don't obey the law. The only thing gun control laws do is make it hard for me to enjoy my favorite sports and to protect myself. The 2nd Amendment was passed right after the Revolution, so the Founding Fathers insured all individuals would have the right to maintain their freedom with firearms, if necessary. And by a multitude of citizens owning firearms in their homes, we have a well disciplined militia at hand. I own a multitude of firearms, and have never even had the thought of taking another person's life with one without threat of great bodily harm. My problem with gun control advocates is that they seem to think that the possession of a firearm makes you a criminal.

do some reading

Visitor — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 09:07:47 -0400

The first ten amendments are the "bill of rights" and each of them offers rights for an individual.

Have you ever read the entire bill of rights? Did they make numbers one and numbers three through ten for the individual but decide to thow one in there that was meant for the states? Every part of the bill of rights is/was meant to protect people from the state. All the states/fed rights issues come up later in the constitution.

Do you even know what 'explicit' means? People have been arguing over the wording for decades, so it's funny that you think arguing that the thing is 'explicit' will change anybody's mind.

And clearly, Gunsrdumb, you have something against people you have no experience with.

"This country should have

Taipei Personality — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 08:13:30 -0400

"This country should have instituted strict car control after Princess Diana was killed but no we let any psycho or moron get a hold of cars and kill innocent people every day in this country and every child and person has the right to go to school or to work or to sit on their porch without being run over because we haven't done enough to get the cars off the streets so you people who feel they have a right to drive cars you had better make sure they dont get in the wrong hands and kill your child or family member."

It sounds pretty ridiculous, doesn't it? That's because rational people understand that a car is controlled by a human being and can be used for either good or bad, depending on who wields the control. Most of us don't attack cars, because we see the good as outweighing the bad.

How much more so for guns? Far fewer people are adversely affected by guns, yet people protect themselves with guns in the U.S. 2.5 million times per year.

Are you a car owner and driver who doesn't understand those people who seriously advocate that cars be outlawed and everyone live in dense, planned apartment complexes and walk or bike to work? Well, look in the mirror - the object is different but the attitude is the same.

RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

stuart griffin — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 07:31:42 -0400

Ms. Kolar ,like most pro-guncontrol people think that criminals are going to register their guns and sign up for some gun safety course, HOW REDICULOUS ! Not inforcing the current laws to punish the criminals is where the problme lies. The PEOPLE must keep and bear arms and the right to protect ones self is a GOD given right . Hitler ,Mussolini and Stalin only wanted their " Militia" to have the right to bear arms also and look what happened.People who are in favor of gun control do not think in a logical manner !

The right to bear arms

John — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 22:00:26 -0400

WOW u shur are ejakatid. But I will wipe that interesting interpretation off of my boots.
I'm sorry to burst your bubble but the same "the people" meantioned as being able to bear arms is the same "the people" that are mentioned in the phrase "We the people ...". Get it?
The militia, if you read any history books, was made up of the average "the people" who took up their arms from their mantles to fight for the same rights you do not hold dear. The Bill of Rights is not a State's Bill of Rights, but rather a Federal Bill of Rights. Try getting some reading glasses so you can focus a bit.

Your a DumbAss if someone

Visitor — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:39:14 -0400

Your a DumbAss if someone was to rape your wife would you want to sit there and watch or do somthing about it a ball bat wouuldn t do much good but a good 44 would sure do the trick!

2nd amendment

Visitor — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 20:20:15 -0400

wrong the 2nd amendment does give you the right to own an assault weapon ! when the bill of rights was drafted these were exsclusively to protect the people of this new born country ! An assault weapon in 1777 was a muzzleloader with a bayonet a .90 caliber. A few hours reading the Fedealist papers would be very educational. As far as armor piercing bullets they were outlawed many years ago. The National Guard had not evolved untill 1929..However if your theory is correct New York State removed the 2nd amendment from its constitution does that mean NY has no right to have a National Guard. This issue will be resolved in the next day or two we'll see...........

the right to bear arms

Visitor — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 20:08:13 -0400

This country should have instituted strict gun control after President Kennedy was assasinated or after Martin Luther King or Robert Kennedy but no we let any psycho or moron get a hold of guns and kill innocent people every day in this country and every child and person has the right to go to school or to work or to sit on their porch without being shot at because we haven't done enough to get the guns off the streets so you people who feel they have a right to bear arms you had better make sure they dont get in the wrong hands and kill your child or family member.

I don't think there4 is any doubt...

Visitor — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 19:43:28 -0400

When the 2nd Amendment was written single-shot, muzzle-loading pistols and muskets were state-of-the-art. Perhaps the founders, visionaries that they were, would have asserted that the citizenry were entitled to own rocket launchers or any other state-of-the-art equipment available to armies. Perhaps a common-sense restriction they may have added would be the forbidding of any record keeping related to the ownership of weapons in event that some entity would have the ability to track down responsible citizens who owned such weapons. Food for thought........

Do you think Americans should have the right to bear arms?

mwilliam — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:08:04 -0400

Does the Second Amendment grant Americans an indivdual right to bear arms or did the founding fathers only intend to empower state militias?