It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Question for Americans: do you support the right to bear arms?

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 11:36 AM
link   
I don't like the trigger-happy attitude in general, for example I don't think you should just an intruder if they cower and run off just to get kicks, but I don't think the police can protect us.

I support the right to bear arms ... BUT ... i do not think assault weapons should be legal, and we should not let crazy people get guns.




posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 11:39 AM
link   
you honestly think that the "crazy people" will try to get assault weapons by going through the gun store? not a chance.

any ban on any weapon will only make crime rise. if the criminals know that citizens don't have weapons, they know that everyone is an easy target.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 11:42 AM
link   
YES, and I think every family should have at least two assault rifles, and four shot guns in the house, it will make this country one of the most safest and curtious places to live on this planet.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 11:49 AM
link   
I support all of our rights. So, yeah.


The problem with an AWB or ANY ban is that it won't change anything. People who want a particular firearm for a crime are already willing to break the law. Anyone who has ever shot anyone with an "assault weapon" is already a criminal. So, making it illegal to own the gun they're using to shoot up a school isn't going to change their mind about doing it. They're STILL going to get the firearm and they're STILL going to shoot up the school. So a ban is perfectly and completely useless.

How many household gun accidents involve "assault weapons"? Think about it. If someone shoots someone with an assault weapon, he did it on purpose. Banning his gun isn't going to get it out of his hands.

[edit on 12-3-2009 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 12:11 PM
link   
Yup - I support the right.

As others pointed out above - a ban will just mean only the "bad guys" continue to have them.

If it gets strict enough the "bad guys" will just switch to knives (such as is happening in the UK now).



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Donnie Darko
 


Why, precisely, is it that you think assault weapons in particular should be illegal? Because they look scary? A ban on assault rifles is a psychological, aesthetic appeal to start the ball rolling on further anti-gun restrictions.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 12:20 PM
link   
While I actually am more of a pacifist, I fully support the 2nd amandment.
I support full access to guns & ammo, to include assault rifles, and full-auto MGs. I beleive each state should have their own militias, and be equipped with fire power to equal the military. (yes, that includes, tanks)
I could even envision an AA-gun per house. (ammo to be issued in times of crisis)
I don't own any weapons, but plan on getting ..maybe two rifles once I establish a foothold back in the States.
You might say that these views are not really pacifying, but bear in mind that I grew up in a country whose politics border on a police-state. My stint in the U.S. Armed Forces opened my eyes to my birth-culture. I do not want to lose the freedom I was sworn to protect. In my eyes the oath I took to protect the Constitution didn't end at ETS!



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donnie Darko

I support the right to bear arms ... BUT ... i do not think assault weapons should be legal, and we should not let crazy people get guns.


I want to ask you a couple questions.

What is an "assault weapon?"

Who decides what "crazy" is?



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donnie Darko
I don't like the trigger-happy attitude in general, for example I don't think you should just an intruder if they cower and run off just to get kicks, but I don't think the police can protect us.

I support the right to bear arms ... BUT ... i do not think assault weapons should be legal, and we should not let crazy people get guns.


I sincerely doubt at the time of your posting you were able to define an "assault weapon."

You couldn't even coherently form your first sentence.

To answer the title of this thread, yes, I support the right to bear arms. That includes the so-called "assault weapons" that you are so scared of.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 

I think that the post was most likely talking about people with schizophrenia, or some other paranoia/delusion inducing disease. I have a housemate who falls into this category, and I've known many others. Let me tell you: they stick out like a sore thumb, and I would not want them to own guns, as a general rule. The obvious problem with passing that legislation would be that the infrastructure isn't in place to run psych-background checks. The less obvious problems are that the legal/ethical status of such checks is not clear, and it would also be a form of psychological discrimination.

As to the original question: I can't fathom what on earth a person would need an "assault rifle" for, but I support the constitution, so any attempt to convince of a ban would have to be rooted in constitutional arguments.

[edit on 12-3-2009 by theWCH]



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by theWCH
 


I take that back, I can fathom at least one reason for wanting assault weapons: they're sort of important to the constitutional right to form a militia.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donnie Darko
I support the right to bear arms ... BUT ... i do not think assault weapons should be legal, and we should not let crazy people get guns.


Assault weapons are already very tightly restricted and controlled. To get one legally, a person must go through a rigorous background check, register the weapon and pay hefty taxes.

What most people mean when they talk about "assault weapons" are semi-automatic rifles whose function is little or no different than that of a dozen hunting rifles, but whose cosmetics match those of real assault weapons.

As has been said, they "look" scary. But they are functionally the same semi-automatic rifle that nobody ever talks about banning.

Further, assault weapons, or "assault weapons" are not widely used in crimes. They tend to be expensive and difficult to conceal. Yes, there are the spectacular shootings we all hear about with these weapons, and one is too many, but they are not widely used in crime.

As has also been said, any ban of these rifles is worthless as regards fighting crime.

To answer the question do I support the right to bear arms? I consider this a human right that the 2nd Amendment only formalizes. So yes.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Yes, I support the Constitution and the right to bear arms as protected by the 2nd amendment.

I'm not in favor of an 'assault' weapons ban, either. Aside from the fact that such a ban will have no effect upon a criminal's ability to acquire or own such a weapon, about 80% of firearm-related crimes in the US are committed by perpetrators using handguns, not scary 'assault' rifles.


[edit on 12-3-2009 by vor78]



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 08:26 PM
link   
No, I actually hate the constitution and all our "rights". Especially the 2nd amendment. Who was the moron that came up with that, anyway? I think guns should be taken away because people are evil and stupid.

















Totally kidding. What the hell kind of question is this? You haven't been here long, have you?



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 08:28 PM
link   
I have a "scary looking" SKS and don't plan on giving it up (I freakin love that thing). If I had the money I'd pick up an AK and lots more ammo.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 08:29 PM
link   
There is only one answer any patriotic American would ever say and that is Absolutly So yes absolutly I do!

-Kdial1

[edit on 12-3-2009 by kdial1]



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 08:34 PM
link   
I support the right to bear arms.

As per the Supreme Court's rulings that have been made over time and the Second Amendment, I think that the matter has been well-defined in America to protect the innocent and prosecute those who would take the "right to bear" to mean the "right to kill."



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by CapsFan8


Totally kidding. What the hell kind of question is this? You haven't been here long, have you?


He or she has been here long enough to know that if you want to make a thread with legs you need to pick a controversial topic and then ask for opinions. My first thought upon seeing the thread topic was "point gathering."

I support the right to bear arms. Period. That was put into the Constitution to safeguard our freedom from threats both within and without. Because weaponry has advanced, I do not think the safeguarding of freedom could be accomplished without a militia that has access to automatic weapons. For that reason, that the basic purpose of the the right to bear arms would be thwarted without the right to bear automatic weapons, I think that the right to own those weapons must also be protected.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sliick
any ban on any weapon will only make crime rise.


I'd go one step further and say any ban on any thing will only make crime rise. As far as gun control laws are concerned though I feel its also a state's right issue and potentially harmful to our 10th admendment. United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 is a decent example of what I mean. If our government really wants to lessen the number of people getting shot I'd suggest they restrict the usage of handguns by our own law enforcement.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 03:40 PM
link   
Why pose the question to only Americans?

Why not also ask those who no longer have the right to bear arms what they think?



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join