There are plenty. Everyone doesn't want to call 911 and wait for the guys with the guns (cops) for 10 minutes while someone who has a gun breaks in and kills their family. You may not know them, but they're out there..
That's not the say I think the bronx is a bad place, I love living here. But theres no shortage of criminals, just not as many as there used to be. I saw someone shot in the head for their jewelry when i was a kid and had to lay down on the ground in the middle of the night because of shootouts outside my window in the 80's. Compared to back then nyc is disneyland.
More gun control is pointless. Criminals dont go to the gun store, register, license, get background checked, and go through the waiting period for their guns. They go to the guy with the stash in his trunk. People who want guns will get them and theres no reason to widen the gap to make it that much more difficult to law abiders to get them than crooks.
I think that people shouldnt just be aloud guns, but need to only be using guns for like animal hunting and protection and not for killing people. Lots of gun stores dont care about that, and they only care if you have money, and they are just like giving away guns away.
I really haven't looked into the debates lately, but even if you're unstable you can still probably study and get enough answers right to get a gun. Unless they have an entrance fee or something. Sorry if that sounded stupid.
honestly who gives a damn about this issue? Is it REALLY a big item to worry about?
Ron Paul is KNOWN as the PROTECTOR of the constitution. If you're really WORRIED about this...vote for him. But come on... who really is going to come and take your gun from you? And if you have an AK47 or full auto assault rifle, they probably SHOULD take it from you. LOL
honestly i dont see what the big hullaboo is about. They will never take guns away... those who want them will get them. I dont think it should be an issue that we should be very worried with
Because even though most gun owners DONT kill people with their guns. The guy at Virginia tech did! If any one would have looked at his back round they would of seen he was not in any condition to own a gun of any type and many lives could of been saved. and he's not the only one. Many people are shot every year, and if we can avoid deaths of innocent people, well why not???
I agree. It's ridiculous that some people interpret the 2nd Amendment to mean that any American has the right to possess a firearm, even people who aren't mentally capable of handling one safely.
It is against the ideas of a free society to assume guilt. If an individual has never committed a crime and has not been proven guilty of a violent act their rights should be protected. It is quite clear that lawful citizens of the United States have the right to bear arms.
Yes of course, but we're not talking about "assuming guilt." What Giuliani is suggesting is that a test be taken so that the proper choice may be made as to whether or not a person is mentally capable of possessing a firearm.
About the example you gave in the video description:
Do you think that Seung-Hui Cho had the right to handle a gun and therefore was just in his massacre?
Good point, however, I feel that there should be restrictions to people who are not mentally and physically able to own a gun. This alone can mean guilt. Remember, the definition of a gun has changed dramatically since the 2nd Amendment was passed. An individual can do far more damage with a gun now than compared to the days of "one shot and reload".
How many people actually buy guns to simply "protect themselves"?? I seriously dont know any...
RebelliousHutterite 4 years ago
There are plenty. Everyone doesn't want to call 911 and wait for the guys with the guns (cops) for 10 minutes while someone who has a gun breaks in and kills their family. You may not know them, but they're out there..
bxblox 4 years ago
What city do you live in where you have to worry about something like that!?
RebelliousHutterite 4 years ago
Bronx, NYC
bxblox 4 years ago
That's not the say I think the bronx is a bad place, I love living here. But theres no shortage of criminals, just not as many as there used to be. I saw someone shot in the head for their jewelry when i was a kid and had to lay down on the ground in the middle of the night because of shootouts outside my window in the 80's. Compared to back then nyc is disneyland.
bxblox 4 years ago
More gun control is pointless. Criminals dont go to the gun store, register, license, get background checked, and go through the waiting period for their guns. They go to the guy with the stash in his trunk. People who want guns will get them and theres no reason to widen the gap to make it that much more difficult to law abiders to get them than crooks.
bxblox 4 years ago
My sentiments exactly...
kipload 4 years ago
I think that people shouldnt just be aloud guns, but need to only be using guns for like animal hunting and protection and not for killing people. Lots of gun stores dont care about that, and they only care if you have money, and they are just like giving away guns away.
kitcatkitty506 4 years ago
I really haven't looked into the debates lately, but even if you're unstable you can still probably study and get enough answers right to get a gun. Unless they have an entrance fee or something. Sorry if that sounded stupid.
anmig 4 years ago
honestly who gives a damn about this issue? Is it REALLY a big item to worry about?
Ron Paul is KNOWN as the PROTECTOR of the constitution. If you're really WORRIED about this...vote for him. But come on... who really is going to come and take your gun from you? And if you have an AK47 or full auto assault rifle, they probably SHOULD take it from you. LOL
firehawk46064 4 years ago
Thats a good argument!
LinkinPark2176 4 years ago
honestly i dont see what the big hullaboo is about. They will never take guns away... those who want them will get them. I dont think it should be an issue that we should be very worried with
xpressin 4 years ago
Because even though most gun owners DONT kill people with their guns. The guy at Virginia tech did! If any one would have looked at his back round they would of seen he was not in any condition to own a gun of any type and many lives could of been saved. and he's not the only one. Many people are shot every year, and if we can avoid deaths of innocent people, well why not???
Halomaster311 4 years ago 3
Please read the description of my video above. That should explain why I simply cannot agree with you.
kipload 4 years ago
By allowing any person in this country to own a gun, in this day and age, can lead to extreme disasters... please realize this
pchaffi1 4 years ago
I agree. It's ridiculous that some people interpret the 2nd Amendment to mean that any American has the right to possess a firearm, even people who aren't mentally capable of handling one safely.
kris1490 4 years ago
It is against the ideas of a free society to assume guilt. If an individual has never committed a crime and has not been proven guilty of a violent act their rights should be protected. It is quite clear that lawful citizens of the United States have the right to bear arms.
kipload 4 years ago
Yes of course, but we're not talking about "assuming guilt." What Giuliani is suggesting is that a test be taken so that the proper choice may be made as to whether or not a person is mentally capable of possessing a firearm.
About the example you gave in the video description:
Do you think that Seung-Hui Cho had the right to handle a gun and therefore was just in his massacre?
kris1490 4 years ago
Good point, however, I feel that there should be restrictions to people who are not mentally and physically able to own a gun. This alone can mean guilt. Remember, the definition of a gun has changed dramatically since the 2nd Amendment was passed. An individual can do far more damage with a gun now than compared to the days of "one shot and reload".
pchaffi1 4 years ago
Good question!
Scotty1137 4 years ago