Speaking as a Brit, I live in a (relatively) gun free society - you can't legally hold and carry a firearm and I'm more than happy for it to stay that way. I feel damn safer over here knowing that in 99% of the places I go there won't be any firearms. (The other 1% are dodgy areas and I avoid those anyway).
The points been well made earlier that your constituton was framed over two centuries ago by people who had no idea of its effect two hundred and fifty years later.
Part of the original reason was to allow the then citizens to hold firearms to defend the fledgling US against external agression (like from us Brits after you booted us out in the War of Independence). Who's going to invade you now? The needs gone away.
If you do want a reasonable right to self defence in (say) your home:
(1) Why do you need an assualt rifle? A .45 calibre revolver will do the job perfectly adequately.
(2) You say you need the guns to defend yourself against other US citizens who also have the right to bear guns - that sounds a pretty circular arguement to me.
Why not pass a law saying anyone found carrying a weapon goes to jail for a minimum of 10 years - I'll bet that would stop a lot of people carrying weapons, and if they don't have them, you don't need them.
And finally - to defend yourself against the state? To overthrow a despotic government?
In the red corner, Joe Citizen with his army surplus M15 and in the blue corner the US military with an Abrahams tank. My money's on the tank every time.
I thought that's why you had elections - to give you the option of booting out a goverment of which you didn't approve. Seems a far more democratic way than saying "this is a despotic government - I'll pick up my M15 and overthrow it"
Phil.



Reply With Quote


Bookmarks