- NEW!
by Ec-nal Licensed Bootie Inspector on February 14th, 2008
Look at it this way, if an armed, law abiding person where in that class when this madman started shooting, maybe he could have been stopped before he killed four kids. Do you really think a person who sets out on a shooting spree cares if he is in violation of ''Gun Control Laws''? lol
by EL1 2 on February 14th, 2008
In Switzerland, everyone has a gun. In Israel, people carry assult rifles to the ice cream shop. I think Americans are just insane and will find other ways to kill eachother if guns are more closely regulated.
by purplepickleater on February 14th, 2008
Your right when is enough enough? How long will honest gun owners have to put up with your paranoia. We don't want to shoot you. It's the dishonest gun owners that will shoot you! Taking our guns gain you nothing.
If I own a freaking' tank and all it does is sit on my front lawn it is not a weapon but a wildlife refuge!
Someone can kill you with a gym sock and $2.00 in pennies. So what will you outlaw next gym socks or pennies?
by angel on February 14th, 2008
I wanted to comment on how many of these turn out to be kids that are medicated They need to quit drugging the whole damn country
by MvL on February 14th, 2008
Were those schools in parts of the country without strong gun laws? Also, did the students steal these from their parents (since no state allows minors to buy guns)?
The greatest school massacre didn't involve a gun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster
Maybe we should also ban sticks and rocks? Rat poison?
Civilians everywhere should have the right to bear arms, concealed or otherwise. Citizens should be able to protect themselves from an unjust or dysfunctional government - no less true today than in 1776. They should also be able to defend themselves from others - criminals will always find their way to weapons. I'd rather have one in case they come knocking. And in a community where people are allowed to carry concealed guns, I, if I were a criminal, would be less likely to try to mug someone. But that's just me.
There is proof that the reasoning that the writers of the 2nd amendment had went beyond militias. It was a revolutionary mindset that is still valid today - unhappiness with an unjust, unrepresentational government out of touch with its citizens and that overtaxed them for its own interests and concerns that are not shared by the bulk of its people. Most people in the US today can relate to this. The revolutionary mindset that the government should fear its citizens enough to stay in line and keep representing their interests is a good one. We've lost our way because we've become complacent in our existence since the revolutionary days.
There is also no statistical evidence that shows an indisputable correlation between gun bans or gun control laws and decreases in violent crime. To the contrary statistics consistently shows that gun laws have either a neutral or negative effect, leaving crime the same or increasing it. I would challenge anyone who disagrees to provide sources. People in favour of gun control or banning laws tend to just be working off a "gut feeling" that it's better to ban them, or out of a personal uneasiness about people owning guns, not any actual statistics. And it's fine to have feelings like that, but they shouldn't be characterized as fact or any sort of factor in making policy changes that affect us all.
by teddybear on February 14th, 2008
I think that the Constitution is very important, but I think this right is a little out of date. When that document was written, people needed guns for food and to protect themselves because there wasn't many people to protect them. Now we can buy enough food and we have the police to protect us. I'm not against hunting. So maybe if we limit the gun usage by civilians to hunting in the proper season, that could be a possibility. Just an opinion.
by Batman on February 14th, 2008
No! People that carry guns legely arnt the ones that are braking the laws. If you outlaw guns then only the criminals will have them. That wont change a damn thing! I do respect everyones right to disagree with me on this, but thats just my soapbox.
by buxtonite ..slowly losing my mind on February 14th, 2008
no just tighten up who can get a gun and start locking up the dunb arsed parents who STILL allow easy access so kids can get the bloody guns in the first place ...I mean how pucking stupid are these people
by Nelson - Jetpacking from bed on February 14th, 2008
It's not so much a matter of availability of guns, it's that responsibility to allowing access to the guns is not controlled. If a kid takes his parents gun and shoots someone, the parent should also be held responsible. Toss a few parents in jail and you will see real gun control (locks, safes, etc). Also, if a kid shoots someone they should be tried as an adult. Don't put them in Juvie for a couple of years and wipe the record clean. Lock them up for life. Do that a few times, and you will see the shootings decrease.
What was the first school shooting?
by Answerbag Staff on June 3rd, 2010
| 1 person likes this
Johnny don't like the teacher Johnny don't like the school will Johnny bring something someday to show he's nobody's fool?
by -O-uknow on April 8th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
Why should the government be involved in school shootings
by netta_neal on March 3rd, 2008
| 2 people like this
Are there kids at your school you worry about starting a school shooting if they ever lost it?
by Mastodon on May 29th, 2008
| 6 people like this
where did the columbine high school students go to school after the shooting of april 20, 1999?
by {were all stars now} on February 6th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
You're reading There has been five school shootings this year(6 weeks).Does not this say there needs to be very strict gun laws.Also the rights to carry guns ,which is part of the constitution ,be amended.When is enough ,enough?
Your favorite Q&A site is on Facebook! Become a fan to connect with the ever-growing community of Answerbaggers, share your thoughts and find out what Answerbag's up to next!
Comments
THANK YOU!!!!
by Batman on February 14th, 2008
I think it could possibly harder to get the gun,and could have been taken from their parent's home,thus had easy access.
by jin jang on February 14th, 2008
so blame the fools who are parents that STILL allow kids to get access to the bloody guns in the first place ...don't hold the rest of the gun owners responsible
by buxtonite ..slowly losing my mind on February 14th, 2008
The greatest school massacre didn't involve a gun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster
Maybe we should also ban sticks and rocks? Rat poison?
Were those schools all in parts of the country without strong gun laws?
by MvL on February 14th, 2008
It is then the responsibility of the parents to safeguard the guns from the kids,so I would hold them responsible.
by jin jang on February 14th, 2008