Should We Have The Freedom To Bear Arms?

This debate was started in another forum I visit and I thought that if it doesn't turn out to be a total flame-fest it'd be a decent debate here.

This was what I said to this:

Debate.

 

It is a freedom in the consitution. If we do not have guns then how would we be able to revolutionize the government if it is needed in the future? People should be able to change the government of their country if need be. The government should be afraid of the citizens not the other way around.

The Virginia Tech shootings should not be a reason as to why our freedoms should be taken away. One person out of what? 300 million? has chosen to use the guns in a horrible, horrible way. I feel quite safe.

Guns have not killed as many people in murders as knives. Should we make them illegal? How about cars? Should we outlaw those because of accidents? Where do you draw the line?

 

Yes we should have the right to bear arms. If something is to be changed from the Bill of Rights, what will stop them (them as in the people who will alter the Bill of Rights) from changing our other rights such as freedom of religion or speech?

 

My reply on this topics question:

Could you please specify "freedom"?
* There is the freedom of speach, but if you say something wrong about a group of people, you'll end up being filled with lead or knives. If you say something bad about an important person, you could even get imprisoned.
* There is the freedom of religion, but if you have a different religion, people will hate you for that and some will even beat you, untill you are convinced otherwise(not all).
* There is the freedom to sue everyone and everything for every little reason.
* Things like gay marriage, abortion (i don't know the word, but when a doctor takes your life, because you don't want to live anymore), are still not accepted in many parts of america.
* Why isn't drugs sold legally, but guns are?


I think there are a lot of countries that have better freedom. (I say better, because they have a different kind of freedom). Take the Netherlands, you can't buy a gun without a licence. A licence is only given out to those that need to use guns for their profession, or to collectors (who only have guns that don't work). You can buy softdrugs at allmost every corner of the street, resulting in drugs not being a problem. We have freedom of speech (well at least we had, now you can't say very bad things about some groups, because they will kill you, i blame the immigrants (not all of them), but that's a different debate). We don't need to sue everything, because we have a very good healthcare-system. No one has to be homeless, everyone can get the healthcare they need (even if you don't have the money for it). Offcourse this is very vulnerable to abuse, but not many people see a reason to abuse it, because it's so good.

You can say "we need guns because we want to defend ourselves", but that's not much of a solution. It would be better to do something about the crime-rate, healthcare and social security, so people don't have a reason to become violent, and you won't have a reason to have a gun.

the above might somewhat unclear and messy, but ask a question (or flame, as you usually do when someone disagrees). and i can explain myself more directly.



The following is copied from another thread, it shows my opinion

It was only a matter of time before someone posted a comment like this...
It'll allways be amerika vs the rest of the world when it comes to guns (that alone would be a reason to give it all a different approach).

1. Offcourse other countries have school shootings. Mentally illness isn't country-related, there is allways a person who snaps, finds a way to get a gun, and do "justice"(offcourse justice in their own mind). What you are doing is comparing the school shootings to the rest of the world (and even when comparing the usa shootings to the rest of the world, the usa would still lead the charts).

1.1 Here is a list of known school-massacres in the world:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_massacres
From all (127) gun-related incidents in schools;
91 are located in the USA
4 are located in Germany
3 in the United Kingdom
12 in Canada
And some other countries not worth mentioning (2 or less): example: the netherlands, bosnia, russia.

2. Comparing guns to other deadly things is like comparing running to crowling when it comes to speed. Running is more efficient in covering distances, as are guns when it comes to killing people (exactly the reason why the military people aren't running around with chainsaws or screwdrivers).
A chainsaw has limited reach (unless you throw with it, but that makes it less durable and less precise), where guns can be used in all kinds of distances.
A chainsaw makes a lot of noise, so killing someone without warning is out of the question.
When using a can of gasoline, you'll have to be close, so using it without the victim noticing you would be very tricky.
Gasoline needs to poured over the victim and chainsaws are difficult to use quickly (heavy) (same as with most things, the more it weighs, the deadlier it becomes, and the harder it gets to manouvre with it). Because everything takes more time then pulling a trigger, it would be easier for the victim to deflect the attack or run away.
So compared to guns, all other things are just not as usefull. So yes, banning guns, or at least control them, would be a good start to prevent massacres such as above. It makes it much less interesting when you have only a screwdriver to kill as much people as you can (because that is mostly the goal).

3. You are partly right about the "guns don't kill people, people kill people" thing. It's true, if you are sane and healthy, you won't use a gun to shoot around you. But not all people are sane and healthy. And the easier it is to get a gun, the easier it is to make the choice to do a killing-spree. A choice is much easier when it doesn't take you a lot of effort.
Example, a lot of people would use a car to get from a to b, if they own one. But only a handfull of people would steal a car to get from A to B if they don't own a car.

I don't get it why the gun-rules are so important to you people. You can't even show the tiniest bit of buttocks, or it'll have "cencured" all over it. You can't swear on tv/radio without it getting "beeped" away. Yet guns are for sale everywhere..

oh, and don't start about the drugs-rules in the netherlands. It works, and that counts.

No offcourse, it won't solve things over night, but it would be a good start. It will take time before the effects are noticable, because guns are so easy to buy for allready too many years...

 

yes... we should

 

Yes. Plain and simple. Our Constitution guarantees us that right for a few reasons:

- An "ultimate insurance policy"--that is to say that, if the government gets it in its head that it'd be fun to turn into what Britain was for us in the mid-1700s, it won't have a chance
- To defend each and every other right guaranteed by that document. That right alone gives the citizens the means to defend against the taking of those freedoms, be they by our own government or a foriegn power (see my first point)
- To defend our nation in case of extreme emergency (i.e. occupation) in the form of a militia. The militia is NOT the National Guard

That's the bare bones of it. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'll turn my rant-mode on.

 

No.

1. No use
2. Bull----
3. Only leads to problems
4. You saw the consequenses

 

You are one very close minded individual. With what you're saying here, they might as well take vehicles away for the same reasons. I will elaborate more on this when I get to work.... (unless ferret beats me to it...)

 

If guns were banned, that wouldn't stop the criminals from owning guns. So at least we have guns to defend ourselves against criminals.

 

yeah, well Canada (where i am, just so you know) doesnt even have that "right to bear arms" thing. sure hunters can get a license, get a gun, go hunting, and since theres alot of open space to the north of where i am, or even anywhere in canada in like the northern half theres alot of empty area, and alot of people like to hunt.

thing is, in canada, we arent stupid, no offense. but serioustly, we get along fine without the guns. think, if that right is gone, then the intruders wont have guns most of the time either. i think it just leaves less room for accident.

 

not really with what these ppl seem to do with these guns.

 

Yeah, and we're not going to change what our entire nation was founded on because of a shootings. Getting rid of the guns (2nd Amendment) opens the door to get rid of the others. That's the one right that prevents the others from being taken.

You may get along fine without guns. We get along juat fine with them, regardless of what you believe. There are roughly 80 million guns in the US and relatively (for the US) low crime considering that. Banning them won't do a thing. They'd be lucky to get a million guns off the streets, much less prevent the gun crime that these knee-jerk bills think they would (gun crime went UP during the Brady bill's period, and that was a [compered to other nations] light restriction).

 

I say we should only have the right to have a weapon may it be for collection or any other emergency (not for just randomly killing someone just out of stress or unstable emotions.) I say that because there to many guns in our country (usa) that are in the wrong hands in some cases its by little children who not knowingly see a gun laying on the floor of their home and just pick it up out of curiousity and then end up shooting themselves. That is another reason why i think gun laws should be tightened up a bit. If they tightened them up a bit don't you think the crime rate will drop? Also if i am reading this correctly from what you said strangling someone is the same as shooting someone. I see that differently and hard to believe, its almost easier to take from a strangliation rather than seeing someones blood and brains all over the ------in place is a lot more emotionally damaging. If you wanna argue about that go ahead i won't stop you.

 

Not a chance anyone should have the freedom to carry arms.

If you look at the murder rate in the United States and compare it to Canada they aren't even close. The people are similar, everything is similar aside from the freedom to carry arms in the States.