How else can a populace defend themselves against tyranny? We won our freedom in a fight, one we hope we never have to fight again but want to be prepared for if need be.
Oh, I thought banning guns would fix all this? Who are you going to fight against? The tyrants are covered under these laws too right? Are you implying some bad people might not surrender their arms?
Lots of people hunt for one thing, people like going to the shooting range, gun shows, protection in this day in age, plus we have the right to have one.
Because our government owns guns. The government should fear us, we should not fear the government.
Our government also owns tanks, missle launchers and nuclear weapons.
That's true. It doesn't absolve the need for a society to protect itself from it's government.
That's such a cliched response.
I feel much better knowing I can protect myself and family if someone tried to harm us...
keep government in line
We are afraid of our own government.
because its my right and we never know if some other country is going to invade us and we have to have protection to defend ourtselves from tyranny in government
I understand owning a gun for protection but I don't want one in my house. I have children and there are just too many gun accidents.
When someone breaks into my home or attacks my son or me, how can I protect myself? If I use a knife, club, or bat, I could be disarmed. And yes, I have been physically attacked before and had my home broken into so I'm not just being paranoid. I will not be victimized again without at least leaving a scar on the attacker to remember to not mess with me again. I target practice and like for others to know they cannot get near me to cause harm without going through a bullet.
Didn't you read the new purposed weapons ban legislation? Don't worry one of the riders is that if you use a paint ball gun and hit the intruder and they don't pretend to be dead and give up they tack on 6 more months when caught...
no offense taken. I no longer hunt. But I still have two (one handgun and one shotgun). It's not a necessity, but a freedom we all share.
Well I don't know it's important for us to own a gun... But as a gun owner I'd ask why are you guys there so willing to fall in line when your government tells you that you can't have something... I'd want a pretty convincing argument that one of my freedoms needed to be taken away, and frankly just because a criminal breaks a law isn't a good argument in my book... Now if these guys were say somewhere where it WAS legal to bring a gun, and then somehow managed to kill people in a completely legal manner with it, then sure... But you see how that works? It's like banning cars because a kid gets killed by a drunk driver... Don't ban the tool, address the act itself... The drinking, alcohol, or bad decision making...
And just because one person views my gun as "unnecessary" doesn't make it so... I view all liberals as "unnecessary" but they haven't banned those here yet either :-)
It's NOT like banning cars. Cars are not designed to kill or wound. Guns are, they have no other purpose. If you believe you should have a gun for your protection, fine. That's a logical reason to have one. The illogical analogies are unnecessary. And the concept of banning "liberals", who have fought for the right of women and people of colour to even be part of the discussion, would be idiotic. (note that I said "liberals", not Democrats. The ideology is not wedded to a specific political party.)
You missed my point entirely... As most good liberals do... It is just like banning the car because they never seek to address the cause... Ban guns all you want these guys will still get their hands on them and kill, or worse just get a knife and kill like they do in China... How about spending all this effort to cook up a way to identify these people? Make our schools safe? Keep guns, illegal or legal, out of these places... That isn't important to liberals because this isn't about keeping anyone safe... It's about taking something they don't like away from people who have them and do like them... That's all it is. Not that it is really a worry for most of us... Obviously they can't outlaw them and obviously they will be as easy to get as the were under the last assault rifle ban.. That worked well now didn't it? And you might be right if I looked up liberalism on wiki... I was speaking more for the actual practice than the ideal..
Please don't parrot the term "liberal" if you don't understand what it means. As as a woman of colour, it makes you look like a moron.
Lol I rest my case... And don't attack my "understanding" of the word liberal... Hate to break it to you but I ain't a woman of color, so opinions vary on what that word means based on how it's used.
No I agree with you... It's just a right... So change the Constitution and make it not a right... That's an actual potential solution... Don't just pay it lip service... Or hey, why not employ security? It's what we do for our money... I know exactly where this thinking belongs because as you say... It's a right... Take that away if it doesn't belong in your world these days...
If the principle that went after the gun man at Sandy Hook, had a hand gun, she would of shot him. If everyone carried a hand gun, do you really believe there would be bank robbers. Store owners being robbed and murdered. In Chicago 2012 over 500 people have been shot. From hand guns by Gangs. Everyday here someone is being shot. So I have a right to protect myself.
How many of those bad boys got shot by law-abiding citizens?
I don't disagree in theory, but if everyone had them there would just be a lot more deaths than there already are... I think guys like these would do it no matter what, they are insane on some level... If the thought of 30 highly skilled and highly lethal SWAT team members gunning for him doesn't scare him, I doubt a 20 yo teacher with a 22 pistol is going to deter him either... Nothing would most likely... He's just going to kill, law or no law, ban or no ban... And it's an insane debate anyway.. HE DIDN'T BUY THE GUN... He stole it... So ban in place or not, this gun was pre-ban and thus still available... So dumb trying to stop something that already happened... Welcome to liberalism at its finest
I don't own one personally, but I have much more respect for my countrymen who see their weapon as a means of self-defense again robbers (a real possibility) rather than those who talk of taking up arms against the goverment (also known as domestic terrorism).
There are so many weapons -- mostly illegally obtained -- already in the hands of criminals & lunatics, there really would be no feasible way to confiscate all those now, so it would hardly make sense to ban law-abiding citizens from legally owning guns if they so choose.
I am a proud gun owner. I enjoy target shooting. I also know how to defend myself and my family if the need arises.
Because believe it or not people break in houses to rape, steal, and abduct.. as a mother you better believe I will defend my home and kids.. So I sleep with 3 rifles, and a shot gun under my bed and a revolver under my pillow.
I worked for the NRA and I found shooting/competing so cathartic! And, if it's someone else's life against mine I choose my life!!! Calling 911 is wise but the time it takes to respond you could be riddled w/bullets and the Perp has a head start.
It always amuses me how Hollywood influences folks beliefs.
We love guns. We grow up leafing through gun magazines where killing tools are glorified, photographed masterfully to look cool and desirable. We feel insecure without a gun. In fact, we feel most insecure having those lunatic, liberal nincompoops around who do not wish to own any firearm. We would feel safer having more guns. We would feel safer if everyone would carry around guns at all times, even the kids and disabled. We love guns.
Exactly. The only difference is that smoking slowly kills the one who loves cigarettes but guns can kill anyone around in seconds regardless whether they love guns or not or still thinking about their feelings.
I am not a gun owner nor am I necessarily a fan of them. However, in the struggle between freedom and safety my bias is always for freedom. Granted, there may be situations where the two go hand-in-hand, but more often than not having one means sacrificing the other in some way. IMO, it is far easier to guarantee freedom than it is safety so I choose freedom (although there are other reasons I go with freedom).
As long as a person is a legal adult, of sound mind (according to the law), are not a (direct) threat to someone else's life or liberty and are otherwise a law abiding citizen, I see no reason to take ANY freedom away from them, especially in the name of some empty promise of safety.
For self defense, from 2 legged magots & wild animals. My most recent was a pack of large dogs after my horses.
I find your comment, about need, to be very offensive. And quite ignorant.
It would appear, you wish to do something to myself, or my family, that the gun would put you at a disadvantage. Don't atempt to harm myself, or mine, and you have no need to fear it.
I don't envy your being a subject of the queen, or your nanny state.
I don't own a gun. It's not important to me until someone pulls on a gun on me or my family then I wish I had a gun to protect myself.
Too late then. Wait 30 minutes for the police to show up.
Sucks to be you... Why don't you re-read your comment and realize you just made the point for having one?
I was being a bit sarcastic. :(