Gun Laws?

[NewsNellie]

It seems that there is an argument about gun laws. The US has the second amendment that allows for the right to bear arms. In today's society it requires for gun licensing and registration.

Many are saying that if guns were allowed on campus (by teachers, administrators, security) by registered, licensed citizens, the schools would not be as vulnerable to gun toting students.

At this point most schools have a "No gun Zone" on the entire campus.


To me, I think this "no gun zone" makes no sense and takes away from the second amendment's right to bear arms.

I'm not suggesting handing guns to all the teachers, but I know some teachers, administrators and security officers would bring a licensed gun with them if allowed, securing them completely unless needed in an emergency.

Until the crazy people with guns know that there may be someone on campus with a gun, they will still attack the most vulnerable place in the US, our schools.

What do you think?

[mezzo soprano]

This is a very delicate issue, as you acknowledge.

My personal opinion? The "no guns allowed" rule is a good one. My fear? That the "no guns allowed" rule won't do a thing to keep the bad guys/gals from brandishing firearms.

The best solution? Again, just in my opinion -- secure entrance points to schools (a huge expense, but worth it), and in high-risk areas, security guards armed with tazers and other defensive items.

I would hesitate to allow teachers or other administrators the ability to conceal-and-carry firearms. I think it just sends the wrong message -- and there is a risk that you could end up with a hostage situation with said teacher or administrator, being held by their own gun. This would not be good.

I continue to pray for peace, but my real side knows better, unfortunately.

[txgurl]

I think there are a few things they can do to help save more lives if we are to allow guns to be sold ; 1)Do a lot better job checking on people's background, 2) make it a law not to sell semi-automatics to anyone. I think it is ridiculous to be selling a gun that can kill so many people in an instant. 3) make it a longer waiting period to get one.4) punish parents with jail or much higher fine for keeping guns that have harmed children or caused children to take them to school or use them.

[ladyboss24]

txgurl -- you just said a mouthful. What purpose is there in selling semi-automatic weapons? I don't get that at all.

I know a guy who is a staunch NRA member, and although I'm not a fan of firearms, this guy has it right. He says that any person who is convicted of a crime involving a gun (armed robbery, etc.) should automatically be given twice the sentence of anyone else committing the same crime without a weapon. And if they are a licensed owner, their priviledges should be revoked forever.

The sad part of this is that so many gun owners respect the law -- it really is a case of a few bad apples ruining the barrel, in my opinion.

[NewsNellie]

This is such a hard topic because there is no right answer. I think its important for us to maintain the second amendment. At the same time, we can't allow only the criminals to carry guns and not allow good citizens the right to protect themselves.

Either way, its dangerous! I can argue with myself because even I can't hold fast on one end or the other except for the fact that we must maintain the second amendment for the right to bear arms.

College students across the country have been strapping empty holsters around their waists this week to protest laws that prohibit concealed weapons on campus, citing concerns over campus shootings.

"People who would otherwise be able to defend themselves are left defenseless when on campus," said Ethan Bratt, a graduate student wearing an empty holster this week on the campus of Seattle Pacific University.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,304806,00.html

[Ginger]

While I agree in the right to bear arms, I think that the founding fathers had a whole different context in mind. It's not like we are a brand new country, forging new territories. We're not fighting "the British" like the colonists were. We haven't fought a war on American soil since... well, you do the math. It has been a while. Where we might have needed to have guns 100 years ago to defend ourselves, is the need really that great today?

Today the idea of bearing arms has been misconstrued to mean "hunting rifles", which I don't think anyone really argues about. I simply see no reason to sell any automatic or semi-automatic guns, assault rifles, or the like.

[lilorphann]

I'm almost scared to chime in on this subject matter, but here it goes. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Too many people are not educated enough to carry and gun so I'm sure they are not educated enough to know how to use one.

There seem to be too many ways around getting a gun and not enough checking to see who is really buying them. I mean if you can buy a gun off the internet who is checking the background of the buyer?

Parents who have guns at home might not be doing enough to educate children about the importance of gun safety, and maybe they are not getting involved in their children's lives enough. I think I would know if my child was getting ready to take a gun and go on a school shooting spree!

Please keep in mind that this is all just my opinion and not necessarily the views of others.

[Marian Paroo]

It's been a long time since there has been any "issue" topic on the boards and I'm glad that one has come up.

As an American living overseas, I am always being asked about the American "thing" for guns. I'm asked about the 2nd Amendment, and I tell them that I see it, there is a specific purpose in the Amendment, maintaining a militia, and it was written before the days of an organized armed forces.

I can see no reason why anyone would need a semiautomic or Uzi in their home. We manufacture the Uzi, and I don't know anyone, who legally has one in their home if they aren't on active or reserve duty!

[NewsNellie]

Of course the semi-automatic and uzi are outlawed. The main thing is the balance required. THe right to bear arms, isn't just valid for our founding fathers. Its valid today for many reasons.

And its just as important for sound, upstanding citizens to have that right in order to protect themselves from others who carry guns to kill.

If no one was allowed to carry guns, only the criminals would have them. :(

[Marian Paroo]

I hate slogans, and that means anybody's slogans, including my own, and if that subject comes up, I'll be glad to discuss that honestly too.

Of course in this context I mean "If guns are outlaws, only outlaws will have guns," or "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

Well, alot of otherwise law-abiding citizens do fudge the gun laws, and guns make it far easier to kill people than any other method.

Even in Medea and Thompson's classic self defense book, Against Rape, women are advised not to argue with a gun. The book isn't nearby right now, but they say something like, "100s of years have gone into making a gun the perfect killing machine."

By the way, the book is some 20 years old, but highly recommened if you can find it.

[mezzo soprano]

I'm almost scared to chime in on this subject matter, but here it goes. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Too many people are not educated enough to carry and gun so I'm sure they are not educated enough to know how to use one.

You don't have to be scared to chime in... this is a civilized discussion, and we all have a right to our opinion.

If there was a clear "right" or "wrong" answer to this question, there'd be no point for the thread, after all.

I agree with your conclusion about gun safety and the lack of education. However, there's this whole supply of firearms out there, and the criminals have no qualms about using them. And they generally *are* educated in the correct use, or at least they know enough to be dangerous (pardon the pun).