The right of the people to own guns is what truly indicates that a certain society is a free society. In the United States- the land of the (mostly) free, there's a heated debate over where to set the limit to the constitutional amendment that gives people the right to bear arms. The obvious answer should be; it's in the bill of rights, there should be no limit. And, indeed, in most states, people are allowed to carry concealed weapons (outside some big cities). However, in some densely populated areas, gun-free zones have been imposed- as always, to protect the people. It's those gun-free zones where a vast majority (probably all of them, but I'm not sure) of shoot-outs take place. Criminals and crazies don't care about gun-free zones. They're going to carry a gun in anyway. Now, let's look at facts that the antis would rather sweep under the carped- Cities and states that allow concealed carry have less gun violence than those that don't. The State of Vermont has no laws concerning firearms (which means, that you can buy as many as you like and when you feel like it). It has 13 times less gun violence than the United Kingdom, where you're not allowed to own a gun at all.
Gun bans only take guns away from the law-abiding citizens. Criminals will keep their guns.
In my mind, had the teachers or security guards been armed when Columbine, Winnenden or Dunblane (the latter two in Europe) happened, many lives would have been saved, if any would have been lost at all.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article2409817.ece
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_YTM_eAWnQ&feature=related
The second amendment wasn't included in the constitution just to guarantee people's right to hunt rabbits. It was to ensure that if, at some point, the government became corrupt to the point of being a threat, the people would have means to overthrow it and restore constitutional values. All of the worlds dictators have disarmed their nations right after gaining power.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkS2BRoCd2I
'Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest' -Mahatma Gandhi
Gun bans only take guns away from the law-abiding citizens. Criminals will keep their guns.
In my mind, had the teachers or security guards been armed when Columbine, Winnenden or Dunblane (the latter two in Europe) happened, many lives would have been saved, if any would have been lost at all.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article2409817.ece
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_YTM_eAWnQ&feature=related
The second amendment wasn't included in the constitution just to guarantee people's right to hunt rabbits. It was to ensure that if, at some point, the government became corrupt to the point of being a threat, the people would have means to overthrow it and restore constitutional values. All of the worlds dictators have disarmed their nations right after gaining power.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkS2BRoCd2I
'Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest' -Mahatma Gandhi
the government wants to take away all types of weapons away from every one like a few years ago they tried to ban all swords i cant remember if they went through with it i dont think so but if they would have that would have been a big blow to all martial arts and their members. me as a member of a martial arts group found out about this through other members of our group. i can recall this was after some crazy person robbed a house and cut up the family with a samurai sword.the gov wanted to ban all sword and there was a petition going against it which was on here
ReplyDeletehttp://www.number10.gov.uk/Page11849
i dont know how it went but i would never give up my arms i paid good money for them