Why do Americans think their right to bear arms is more important than people's lives?
Our rights guaranteed by the Constitution cannot be taken away from us by our government. Period.
People take other people's lives for many reasons, using many different methods and weapons. Singling out gun rights is just plain silly and is a favorite fight picked by those who can't think of a better way to stop killers from killing.
Just because something can't be taken away doesn't surely mean that it is right?
I don't think singling out gun rights is 'silly' (that in itself strikes me as a frivolous statement) when someone can go out and shoot dozens of people at a time.
Azure, Should we take away our other Rights as well? Or what about knives?
That's really not true. Our 4th amendment rights are pretty well hammered away at, since 9/11. And the 8th has long been broken with our decrepit justice system. The r's want control of my uterus.The ONLY right that seems to be prevail is the 2nd.
Its an Amendment. It's amendable. The government isnt trying to take your guns away. I am, with every other person who doesn't hunt/shoot targets/need protection on the off chance they walk into a shoot-out (if only everyone was armed to the teeth)
If you have the time to read about how the human brain functions and how someone can in the process of his life become a criminal, you will see that having easy access to weapons simply makes a criminal act a lot easier.
Azure, that is EXACTLY what a right is. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights was ratified so that the federal government could govern on a limited basis and NOT take our rights. It is called the Bill of Rights for a reason.
I am starting to believe that those weapon bearers will need their arms when the economical situation of the US will collapse! Maybe it is the reason why they want to legiferate on that subject! Less weapons in the streets would mean containment of the population, more and the eye for an eye will prevail!
The justification is that the government might turn on its citizens someday, and if the people were gunless they would have no way to fight back. People refer to guns as "the people's liberty teeth." Many other countries do have gun control and criticize America for not having it. However, should someone wish to do unspeakable things with a gun, even if guns are outlawed, there wouldn't be much stopping the person from buying one off of the black market. At that point, there would be more guns in the hands of criminals (of which the black market is comprised) than in the hands of regular people who may use a gun to defend against said criminals.
That said, I do believe it is simply an issue of our culture. American movies put a lot of emphasis on guns and killing, and therefore desensitize many to the value of human life. In other countries, there is not such a problem with guns. Many say this is a direct result of gun control, but black markets exist in any nation. No, it is simply that fact that the cultures of those countries are different from ours. They value human life more than some Americans do.
Thankfully, culture can change. Better yet, the masses can become collectively more intelligent. Perhaps it is not the violent movies' fault, or hip hop's fault, or anything else that self-professed "culture warrior" try to blame. It is the American people's fault for taking those things too seriously.
How can you say that other countries' cultures value human life more than ours? Even been to Africa? How about the Middle East? How many times have you been to Mexico? And if you think we own guns because of the movies or hip hop you're deluded.
KK, I obviously didn't mean every other country values life more than us. I'm saying that homocide rates are lower in nations that value life more than us and that it is their culture that allows them to achieve those low rates, not gun control.
One is not more important...that is a "straw dog" argument. My question to you is how does the right to bear arms, in the hands of law-abiding citizens, endanger people's lives?
Because people are abusing that right and killing people.
Azure, I don't think they'd be considered law abiding if they were killing people. Just because criminals get hold of guns doesn't mean none of us should have them. I certainly feel safer knowing I can shoot an intruder rather than try to fight him!
Americans don't think so. A majority supports sensible restrictions on the manufacture, sale, possession and use of handguns and military style rifles. Gun manufacturers and dealers, the NRA and a minority of militias, survivalists and gun nuts oppose any and all gun control measures. Our federal and state legislators cower in fear of the NRA.
I am just not understanding what one thing has to do with another. The right to bear arms is in our constitution so that regular people could protect themselves, whether from their own government or some idiot trying to break into their house to steal their tv so they can go buy drugs. You seem to be using what happened in CO as an example, that WE as Americans value our guns more then others lives. That is kind of like saying that people in England value knives more than people because of Jack the Ripper, it makes no sense. I, myself do not own a gun, wouldn't know how to fire a gun, and don't particularly want one, but I own a baseball bat and several sharp kitchen knives, does this means I value them more than peoples lives? As the old saying goes, guns don't kill people, people kill people.
There are many examples to use unfortunately as well as CO. It is way easier to go and shoot many people with a gun (emotionally and physically) than it is to go out and mass kill people with knives so I don't think you can equate the two.
So you are saying that because one mentally defective person chooses to go shoot people that we should all have our rights to own weapons taken away? Try this: http://news.yahoo.com/chinese-teen-kill … 29246.html
I wish there were no guns. That is not going to happen because the old cliche that if you take away the guns only criminals will have guns.
Guns have a place for self-defense and responsible hunting as well as target practicing to improve eye-hand coordination.
Sensible laws need to be in place. If there is an intruder in your house, you should have the right to protect yourself and your family. If the intruder leaves, you should not be allowed to chase him so you can shoot him. When he leaves,call the police.
Gun safety courses should be required of all gun owners and gun registration should be required at the federal level. The federal government cannot pass any laws limiting the right to bear arms. States can have registration laws and the states can be required to show that information with a central agency. I would like to see a ballistics test on file for each gun sold in the U.S.--that is not going to happen.
To answer your question the right to bear arms is not more important than people lives. The importance of the right to bear arms is to protect yourself and your family, if you are so inclined to own a gun. Everyone has his own preference.
Banning guns will not stop the mass shootings. Those people will find a way. Having people carrying concealed weapons will not stop the mass shootings. Most likely more people will be killed by untrained and scared shooters.
You make great points, but you're right about the test not happening. Only because those of us who care about laws would do it, but the criminals don't care about following rules. I would rather shoot a potential rapist than be raped in my bed.
I too agree that part of the problem is ineffecient gun laws and a stricter law for obtaining a gun (age restriction, safety course being manditory, etc).
While I was still living in the States, the rise in crime or a sense of fear made people feel that they needed protection. Perhaps where there are very many and different types of people there isn't a sense of unity. Or perhaps due to the type of lifestyle people lead in this modern-day-and-age people are less social. Another problem is that it's way too easy to purchase arms in the States. Anyway, the problem is rooted deep within society and associated with how a government treats its people.
I'm not a gun nut, but I don't think a few horrible incidents in a nation of 300 million people should justify altering the Constitution. Guns are only as dangerous as the person using them. It's like having a can of gasoline. That is some pretty dangerous stuff to carry about, but you can buy as much of it as you like without a permit. Violent and determined people will always find a way.
More people are killed every year in vehicle accidents than in incidents involving firearms. Before you castigate something, broaden your knowledge a bit, please.
Should we now ban cars because they are used as the tools of murder/homicide for a MUCH larger number of deaths than guns?
Banning firearms will not save lives, so it's not a matter of the right to bear arms being more important than another person's life. It's a matter of being a citizen of an allegedly free country where the rights of the individual are allegedly sacred.
I'm sure, since you posted your question from an iPhone, that you believe your right to own a cell phone is pretty important...but did you do some research first to find out how many people die each year as a result of someone texting or talking on the phone and getting into a car accident?
Equating the right to own a cellphone or a car to the right to own a gun I'm afraid is just ludicrous! The primary use of cars is transport. The primary use of guns is to kill things. More people die of cancer too but that is also not my point.
Azure, there is NO right to a cell phone, car, health ins., a job etc....there is a Constitutional right to "keep and bear arms" as found in the 2nd Amendment which is the law of the land. Do you believe in the other 9 rights in the Bill of Rights?
Proper laws may not reduce the total number of people killed each year. Proper laws could reduced mass shootings and some accidental deaths from guns. Guns are becoming more dangerous--we have to start somewhere to limit use by some people.
by Alem Belton 6 years ago
Okay so another guy dresses up like The Joker and kills people. I will resist the urge to state how bizarre and coincidental that is and stick to the question.The media is intent on showing Americans all the LEGAL gun killings they can while not informing us about the countless lives that are...
by Charlotte Gerber 4 years ago
Should U.S. citizens continue to be able to have guns (assuming they carry a permit)? Hillary Clinton doesn't think so. There are several sides to this argument. One consideration should be that certain people need guns in the course of their jobs such as law enforcement (a given), but...
by Cindy Vine 9 years ago
Should guns be restricted to military, police and security guards?
by cwoodman207 9 years ago
Say we no longer have the right to bare arms. The government is doing a sweep collecting all registered firearms. Would you allow your right to go down the river or would you stand up to the regime and refuse? Either way give me some opinions please be honest.
by leeberttea 10 years ago
... to carry regardless of state or local laws?I think the Supreme Court will rule today that Americans, all Americans have the constitutional right to carry guns and states and cities can not limit that right! This is huge and if the cour rules as I suspect will be an affirmation of liberty as the...
by Jeff Berndt 8 years ago
I just noticed something about the Fast and Furious controversy.Leaving aside the question of whether the operation was a good idea or not (I think not), I noticed that the Left and the Right have both seemed to flip-flop on their usual arguments about gun control.The Left usually wants to restrict...
Copyright © 2021 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|