Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Gun Control...your thoughts?
It seems I've been misunderstood recently in the way I answered a question about the upcoming election with its regards to potential new firearms regulations.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Aglqn...
My intention here was not to support any proposal to put more restrictions on our right to own firearms, but to bring up a few points for thought. As one answerer incorrectly supposes, I am not one of those who "give up our rights for supposed peace and safety..." In fact, I am the proud owner of more than 20 firearms, and I thoroughly enjoy the opportunity to use them recreationally as well as my right to carry them for defensive purposes.
I do, however, want to bring up the question to determine the opinions of fellow hunters. How (do you feel) should we approach this situation? I mentioned the logic behind registration and received a very negative response. What are your ideas?
Thank you for all of your thoughts here. Most of you brought up extremely valid and well-pointed arguments. Some of the information here is new to me. I appreciate the input.
I'll use the words of Thomas Jefferson to sum up my opinion of gun control, just to make myself completely clear.
“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms… disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants…” — Thomas Jefferson in “Commonplace Book,” 1774-1776
Also for the record, I don't t think that a combative approach is the way to secure our rights for the future. As long as we make statements like, "From my cold, dead fingers...", we're bound receive extremely negative responses from both liberals and those who are not quite where we are on the issue. We must present an image of responsibility to those who oppose our position, so even if they disagree with us, they will respect us for our thought-out and civil approach to the issues at hand, giving them no foothold for slander. There is nothing to be gained from a threat of violence, no matter how valid it may be. The best way to approach the issue is through intelligent and informed discussion with the opposition. As far as the media is concerned (though it is not true), we are in the minority on this issue. So long as we present a despicable image to that media, we are bound to get torn apart by it. We must make decisions that build trust and community, not contempt.
18 Answers
- HLv 71 decade agoFavorite Answer
Unfortunately Corvo, this is the way that politicians view gun control:
Gun control is NOT about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals: IT IS ABOUT CRIMINALIZING GUN OWNERSHIP.
Everyone who is a regular here knows that when guns are outlawed ONLY outlaws will have guns. How then shall we protect ourselves from those with murderous intent???
We are unique and fortunate among Nations in having a Second Amendment. The Founding Fathers in their wisdom penned the Second Amendment for a three-fold reason:
1. They were tired of dictatorial governments and so they wanted to insure that our great Nation would NEVER fall victim to dictator wannabes.
2. They KNEW that citizen-soldiers were a great defense should a foreign power ever try to overrun our great Nation.
3. They knew, accepted and RESPECTED the God-given right of self-preservation for EVERY individual and so they penned the Second Amendment to protect the individual from those with murderous intent.
Today the third reason I have listed above IS the most important as evidenced by news coverage of all those recent tragedies that could have been prevented or at least lessened had some law-abiding private citizen been present with the means and the way to stop the carnage.
Politicians who erode our Second Amendment Rights place our lives, our freedom and the pursuit of happiness for Americans in dire jeopardy. These politicians are NOT friends of the people.
Concerning reason #1 listed above and anti-gun politicians: We must question their motives. Are they perhaps... Dictator wannabes? Inquiring minds want to know.
Concerning reason #2 above listed: In this present-day atmosphere of home land security what politician sincerely interested in the well-fare of our great Nation would want to rule over an unarmed populous??? Again, inquiring minds want to know.
Reason #3 above is for the average person STILL the best reason for having a Second Amendment well and intact and respected by sincere politicians and those who aspire to the office of President without any intent of malice. Those who disrespect OUR Second Amendment Rights are NOT worthy to sit in the Oval Office.
Be careful how you vote.
H
- Anonymous1 decade ago
The whole thing is a Catch 22...
"All gun-control schemes are based on the premise that criminals are going to obey the law." - John McCain (Interview with the NRA)
Keeping weapons away from "criminals" is a pipe-dream, though I wish it was not. The fact is... no matter how you look at it, regulation, registration, banning, or otherwise will only affect law abiding citizens. I assure you that the criminal element will still find a way around these "schemes" and could still care less about what the "Law" is.
ENACTING ANY LAW - Will only affect those whom actually FOLLOW the LAW. PERIOD!
IMO - We should certainly have stiffer penalties for those who commit crimes with guns. For all I care, if someone uses a gun in the commission of a crime... lock them up permanently, I would rather my tax dollars go toward defending my rights, then regulating them!
The laws should be written to punish the criminals, not the law abiding citizens of this Country! No matter what the reason... regardless if you're pro, or anti guns... we cannot stand for our Constitutional rights to be taken away in order to "Control" anything... let alone something that obviously will not work.
If a law is written to "control" an element that by nature does not follow the law... what sense does it make?
- Background Checks: Sensible, and Responsible.
- Registration & Regulation: Attempt to control citizens
- Banning: Erasing YOUR constitutional right!
Source(s): Cold, Dead Fingers...! - 1 decade ago
Okay, that was my question. I think for the first two paragraphs, you were increasingly on shaky ground with most gun owners. What put you over the top I believe is when you mentioned favoring Obama and Hillary. You make your points and your perspective is a valid one. However, most gun enthusiasts are serious about the 2nd Amendment and that it shouldn't be tampered with. The trends of the the political party Obama and Hillary represent have in recent history been unfavorable to the 2nd Amendment and its supporters. We gun enthusiast are a sensitive lot when it comes to our freedoms. When the politicians and bureaucrats start to threaten the foundation of our power as a people, we recognize it as nothing less than an attempt to disarm their subjects. The very guns that they want so badly to restrict are the very guns that would make We The People effective in resisting their unwelcome advances. Those guns are the semi-automatic "assault rifles" and concealable handguns. Additionally, I think fully automatic weapons should be more available to citizens as well. Tens of thousands of dollars and jumping through difficult regulatory hoops has essentially placed these weapons out of reach from all but those with extreme determination, and those with more money than most people can afford to spend. I agree with the guy above, don't make laws that criminalize otherwise law abiding gun owners. Enforce and make stricter sentencing for the criminal mis-use of firearms .
- gunplumber_462Lv 71 decade ago
You state, "Aside from the fact that it will cost a fortune, I have nothing against requiring the registration of all firearms (it's sensible, even if it's a bit of a pain, and if it helps prevent the wrong people from owning them and committing atrocities, then all the better)".
You received a very negative response because people understand there is absolutely no purpose for gun registration other than to track where guns are so they can be taken later.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 1 decade ago
" The right to Keep and Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed." There is nothing in the 2nd Amendment about Fees, Registration, Permits, Gun Free Zones, Post Offices, Government Buildings, Airports, Special Training, Open Carry, Concealed Carry, Fingerprinting etc..* Don't you realize your 2nd Amendment rights have and are being Violated, Subverted, Compromised and Denied already?** This is not what our Founding Fathers meant by the wording in the 2nd Amendment.* " Government is not Reason; it is not Eloquent; it is Force. Like Fire, it is a Dangerous Servant and a Fearful Master.">>George Washington Father of our Country.**... " NO Free Man Shall Be Disbarred From Owning His Gun.*>> Thomas Jefferson.** " LIVE FREE OR DIE."... " I Would Rather Die on My Feet, Than Live On My Knees." ** In other words its a bunch of B.S.>*
Source(s): Run like a Deer.*.............Fly like an Eagle.* - Anonymous1 decade ago
I feel that all gun laws should be repealed. I believe that would make society safer because more people would be armed, sure you would get some bad apples, but most people are responsible. Think about it, how many bad guys would rob a bank if every body in the bank was armed.
I was reading the other answers, and I saw references to Hitlery(not a typo) and Obama who both want to completely take guns away from law abiding citizens. I also saw mention of McCain who wants to limit our 2nd amendment rights even more. But I saw no mention of Dr. Ron Paul who believes that the gun bans should be destroyed and also believes that every law abiding citizen should have a gun for protection of self and country.
Source(s): RonPaul'08.com - 1 decade ago
IMHO, I should be able to purchase and own any firearm I choose, without any restriction on number of firearms, type of firearms or any form of registration. It is simply none of Uncle Sam's business what and how many I own. I do agree with a background check as I think it is prudent to mitigate sales to the wrong folks.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Gun control = using both hands.
Seriously, there just happens to be a lot of granolas on Y!A that oppose and constantly give a thumbs down to people who respond and express any interest in hunting and firearms.
Source(s): Firearms owner. - Anonymous1 decade ago
Hey, your ideas are the best I've ever read on Yahoo Answers. You seem to be one of the few that realize that guns really can be very dangerous in the wrong hands. I own guns and I wouldn't like to see a complete ban, but firearm reregistration and background checks are no problem for me at all. As long as you are a law abiding citizen and you have nothing to hide, whats the problem? I support the right to bear arms, but we have to be responsible about it. Too many people are killed each year by guns and the solution is NOT to flood the streets with AK-47s.
Source(s): P.S. -- I just gave you a thumbs up on your other answer!!!