So it's been a while.. a debate!

It boils down to the government creating enough constricting laws whereby the most law-abiding citizen will be breaking a law eventually.

Free, law-abiding citizens are people over whom the government has no control. To gain that control the government must create an environment in which the free, law-abiding citizen can't exist.

 

Hamma, you're in Texas now. Texans love their guns.

And Mani, I've heard for a long time that if guns are made illegal, only criminals will carry them. That leaves the rest of us in a bad place.

 

I totally agree, sky. If guns are made illegal, then law-abiding citizens become criminals and criminals stay the same.

I will never give up my weapons...ever.

 

My uncle sent this:

 

You rock sky...

 

Not much of a debate is it ?

Of course everyone here would be in favor of firearms rights....Heck we all like to shoot other people in virtual worlds.


But no seriously, gun control is a hack. Look at England and other countries that have banned firearms and there is factual data to support that shows the crime rate has escalated phenomenally since banning firearms because criminals will still carry the weapons and they know normal citizens do not carry so they are not nearly as afraid.

Whereas states like Texas where EVERYONE and their mother carries a weapon, the normal crime rates are not as high because the criminals are afraid of facing down a weapon during a crime. Criminals are at hearts cowards and wimps.

 

I doubt the coalition was named or formed strictly for that particular vote. This is a question of state rights rather than gun control. States can and should determine how they want to address the issue of personal weapons.

This is the same reason your driver's license is state issued and not a national license. Its up to the state to set the criteria for eligibility to operate a motor vehicle. Each state is free to determine if it allows individuals licensed in another state to drive legally in their own territory.

Imagine the economic implications if drivers had to obtain a license before being able to drive in each state. Shipping costs would go up, supply would decrease, etc. When its proven that lack of concealed carry across state lines has the same impact you will probably see a shift in attitude.

The idea of some hoodlum from Detroit freely walking into California with a concealed weapon is about as terrifying to me as seeing a car with an Ohio issued license plate on the road.

 

My opinion on concealed carry (and gun control in general) is that the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It doesn't say anything about a legal requirement to bear one's arms in plain view, so concealing a gun on one's person is, therefore, a Constitutionally-protected right. In my opinion, no permit should be necessary to exercise one's Constitutional right.

Guns and gun rights are an interesting issue for me, because every common point of view on the issue makes me uncomfortable. The arguments for gun control make me uncomfortable, because they exhibit what appears to me to be an unhealthy desire to control the lives of others. Not to mention, gun control is in direct conflict with the 2nd Amendment, so any argument should really be in favor of a Constitutional amendment, in order to avoid this.

I support gun rights completely (see above) but the argument in favor generally springs from the right to defend oneself against criminals. I think that a much easier argument to make is that, as we live in a free society, people have the right to own and use whatever item they want to, and guns are no exception just because they have the potential to be dangerous (cars, for example, have as much potential to be dangerous, and almost everyone has one of those). Or, there is the hunting rights argument. The right to life is enshrined in the Constitution. Hunting is a method of acquiring food, which is necessary for eating, which in turn is necessary for living, therefore the right to life implies the right to hunt for food. Why must the argument for gun rights always be the one in favor of killing people?

 

Good points, Symen. The right to own a weapon serves a dual purpose. One, it enables the individual (as you noted) to provide food for his family. Two, it serves to provide a way in which a law abiding citizen can protect himself, his family and his property--including his country--when needed.

The government has no business telling individuals what they will do or not do concerning a constitutional right.

It is interesting to witness the recent move by many states to reaffirm the 10th amendment which says, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

I firmly believe many Americans are waking up to the fact that the government has overstepped it's constitutional authority. If we do not learn from history, we are doomed to repeat it.

 

A very good point about protecting the country, as this was the original intent of the 2nd Amendment: The establishment of a militia (in 18th-century context, a militia consisted of all able-bodied citizens capable of defending the country).

This is still a very effective deterrent, too. As Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto of the Japanese Navy said during World War II, "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

This is very interesting, and a move which I applaud -- the 10th is perhaps my favorite amendment.

The government overstepping its authority is, unfortunately, nothing new. I think some of the more egregious examples of this during the last administration (the PATRIOT Act, warrantless wiretapping, indefinite detentions without trial, etc.) really started to wake people up to this sort of thing and got them to be more civically engaged, which is very good for the country. The current administration's record has been very disappointing on constitutional issues, as well, which I think is going to engender further calls to restrict government authority. This could be a very good thing in the long term.

 

Look what my uncle sent this time:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNmi-bBhWG8

 

American ingenuity and capitalism all wrapped into one!

 

Crap I bought my car to soon!