pro

Oh by far very pro gun control. Just to add this in...The only person that we should support having a weapon is the police...As i hope some have learnt from virginia tech.

I think that the laws they have on the books now are difficult/impossible to enforce. If anything, i think it should be a lot harder to buy a gun.

I've been pro gun control for the last 20 years in a row. People need guns for two reasons. reason 1 is to hunt reason 2 is for self defence There are no other sanctioned uses for a gun. People should have to qualify both a background check and a psychological profile evaluation before they are deemed to have a gun. There should also be a limit to the total guns one should own as well as limits to caliber and rate of fire. Hollow point bullets and killer guns like a .45 should not be valid choices for self defence.

I am pro gun control. However I do own firearms. What needs to be controlled is how many guns are available, and to purchase one, you should be required to be licenced and tested. What bothers me is when people try to cite the 2nd Amendment. It does not say that everyone has the right to bear arms, it says that every citizen has the right to bear arms for the purpose of a state militia. So technically, you should not be allowed to own a firearm unless you are in the National Guard.

I am pro gun control.Hand guns and assault weapons should be completely banned and not sold to anyone under any condition.Guns have no place in modern society,as we have seen in school shootings.

pro

i don't see any reason why guns shouldn't be controlled. they're a dangerous thing. don't get me wrong, i'm a SERIOUS believer in the whole "guns don't kill people, people kill people" thing, but the fact is, people USE guns to kill people, and if they were harder to get, they'd be harder to shoot people unnecessarily with, plain and simple.

Anti. If every qualified person was armed, events such as at Virginia Tech could not happen. He would have been shot very quickly. People who have been diagnosed as being a danger to themselves and others, convicted felons, etc., should not have weapons, but everybody else who wants to should, it is a Constitutional right!

To Nelson: Q1 - Crossing state lines is a problem that could be solved only if each state were willing to enact border controls equal to the Iron Curtain. Q2 - Impossible to quantify. How can we account for all cars ever made? Q3 - It's "The Bill of Rights" not "The Bill of Needs". The 2A specfically states that arms in the hands of the people are needed for defense. The Congress has Constitutional power to regulate the types of arms the militia should use, but has chosen not to do so. To draw a simile, what does a city dweller need with a pickup if they are not engaged in a moving business or in building trades? What does a suburbanite really need with a SUV if they never have a need to leave pavement? See where "needs-based" thinking lead you?

Anti

Im from England where it is extremely difficult to buy a gun legally but quite easy to buy one illeagaly, I could walk into quite a few pubs where i live and pick one up for the price of a new t.v. If you use any legally owned gun to defend yourself you are open to prosecution, however i do believe i live in a safer country due to gun control, im pretty sure if im confronted by someone they are not going to pull an uzi on me.

I am for neither. I am for the reform of fire arm laws. It's painfully obivious that something needs to change even if it makes someone mad.

anti..I grew up near a large army base during the Vietnam and Cold War Era's...The thought of the government having that type of firepower (and the local police, etc) and civilians only having shotguns is scarey to me. History has proven over and over again that civilians have to be able to protect themselves from their government or the ones in government who believe their way is the ONLY way will at some point try to force their way on the country.

I am 100% against guns. There are no need for guns! I HATE GUNS!!!

Pro gun owner control

I am pro-gun. History shows us the best way for citizens to defend itself from big government to arm themselves. Does Nazi-Germany ring a bell? Why should people who commit crimes, purchase guns illegally, and their actions dictate what law-abiding people can do? There are those that say gun control/banning guns is the best for modern society, right? So tell me why the 39 states that don't have strict gun laws have the lowest gun-related crimes (to include murder and robbery)? Tell me why the 4 lowest crime rates in the country are in states with liberal gun laws? Governmental bodies like the UN are why I feel this nation needs law-abiding people to own weapons. Without them, the UN would have already claimed this free nation as its own. That's right, the UN seeks to disarm all nations, especially this one, Switzerland, and Israel so it can fully begin to govern the world. It'll be a cold day in hell before that happens.

I think there needs to be some control. It has just gotten too crazy these days. Any hunter who needs a semi-automatic handgun should probably take up another hobby anyway. How many people have to be killed before we realize that something has to change?

I am opposed to gun control. As a matter of fact I am working on creating a gun rights club: http://gwshoots.com

Pepper spray is a chemical weapon, yet is considered a personal defence weapon. Are you seeing my point? So if I don't see a need for a farmer to have a MAC-11, but I see a need for a tactical nuke, why can't I have one? Your argument is understood, and as to the laws, I am somewhat familiar. You still have yet to answer the question, where do you draw the line? Good debate, I appreciate it by the way.

I am 100% anti-gun control. There are several facts to back up this side of this subject. First of all, it has been proven time and time again that the more rights of citizens to have firearms, results in a reduction of the crime rate. A perfect example of this is Florida...In 1987 they passed legislation that allowed an ordinary citizen with no mental problems or crime record to carry a concealed firearm. Here are the results of their crime rates from 1987-1996... Homicide rate -36% Firearm homicide rate -37% Handgun homicide rate -41% As well as the murder rates going down, the 222,000 people in Florida with a concealed-weapon permit...not one has ever shot a police officer or has been arrested for murder. There have been many instances where a permit holder protected a police officer. (this info can be found at http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp ) This is also similar for every other state that has enacted a similar law since 1987. Next, everyone talks about England being so much safer from gun crimes that the US. This has very little truth. Their murder rate is considerably lower than ours, however since 2001, their robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, and motor vehicle theft has been higher than ours...and it is getting higher every year. I would encourage readers to go to http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/rsrch/briefs/b29/b29_e.shtml and see the results of a study done. But in a nutshell… Since 1990, basically every crime type (robbery, murder, aggravated assault) has been going down in the US and has been going up in Britain. And it has continued to go up even after their strict laws on guns started. Finally I would like to show you people several graphs….The first graph is the murder rate in the US. Compared to Canada and England… Since 1990 the US murder rate has decreased significantly down to 5.7 per 100,000. It has stayed at about this rate for the past 4-6 years. The 2nd and 3rd graph show the states that allow citizens to carry concealed firearms. Notice that since 1990 there has been many states that now allow concealed weapons. This coincides with the time period murder rates went DOWN dramatically in the US. Finally, the 4th graph shows the 10 states with the highest murder rates. Notice they basically all of them are on our southern border with Mexico. This is due to the numerous Mexicans that are members of Mexican gangs that come into the country and commit murder. Yes, believe it, it really happens. Some experts say that the US murder rate could decrease to 3.0 per 100,000 if we stopped illegals from crossing the border. Well that’s all I have to say. But for all of you out there that don’t think civilians should own guns…since there are no facts that back up your belief that it works. You could try to get the US politicians to stop illegal aliens from getting into the US. That would help decrease the murder rate more than anything else. P.S. To prevent another disastrous school shooting. How about we allow a well-trained teacher to keep a weapon on his person at all times??? This would allow the school to stop a killer before he kills a lot of students. And since the weapon would be concealed and hidden away inside the teacher’s shirt, any student who wanted to go on a killing spree wouldn’t know the teacher has a gun.

I am firmly commited to the notion of gun control. After all, why bother to own a firearm if you can't hit your target?

I am anti ...I'm an Aussie and have seen what happens when the government bans guns ...the crims are running amok ...more gun grimes sinse they banned us law abiding people from having them and now even knife related crimes are through the roof ...and the sale of illegal hand guns is everywhere ...I can go to a pub and get a hand gun in 20min..loaded for $300...its a f**king joke ...blame the dogooders

The only way you will keep guns out of criminal's hands it to get rid of ALL the guns and there is no way that can happen. Gun laws only keep guns out of law abiding citizen's hands.

Im pro control, but anti-ban

anti gun control

ANTI

I'm anti,in Britain we have the tightest guns controls in the world and yet people still carry and use guns and this figure is rising all the time,so we might as allow people to legally own guns and even up the odds.

i am pro gun control . i think you should hit what you are aiming at.

I am a middle of the road gun control supporter. I don't think you need machine guns to hunt deers, but you should have the right to carry or have guns.

ANTI! I want my .357 Magnum and I better be able to get it!

a gun will save your ass'

we need guns' anti' all the way.

guns rule'

Only in keeping them out of the hands of criminals or the unfit. Everyone else should have the right to carry them at will. Honest citizens shoudn't have their rights stripped of them because a few abuse it.

I think that if you want to own a gun, thats fine. Defense against animals or defense against robbers. But when you have a machine gun, the only reason you have it is to kill other humans. No person in this country needs a machine gun unless they want to kill other people.

I like guns... i used to collect em kinda I guess im anti... Im anti-stupid though, maybe there needs to be a common-sense quiz for Gun owning prospects

Gun control is for Fascists, Nazis, Communists & Socialists.. But if you can't control your own gun wisely, then you don't need a gun. but the American Government has no right to strip us of OUR rights. If you think firearms should be banned, then you shouldnt be an american.

Pro gun-control

Pro gun-control. It's just too easy to get guns in the U.S., either on the street, in illegal gun shows, or from gun dealers. Regulate the process of purchasing a gun, and crack down on illegal gun sales. And why should ANYONE outside the military have access to automatic and semi-automatic weapons? Too many kids in urban America have easy access to guns. I understand the rural and suburban folks here, some of whom live 50 miles away from their nearest law enforcement--I understand the right to protect your home and family. However, in places like Washington DC, Los Angeles, and Detroit, too many kids are shooting each other down, and too many maniacs have already gone on shooting sprees around the country. In those situations, how easy was it for the shooter to purchase those weapons? Look at the Virginia Tech shooter, look at Columbine.

Anti.

i am 100% anti gun control

Anti I don't need government telling me how to control my guns.

Pro for me having one and anti gun for the other person having one.

Pro gun control.:-)+

I dont like guns that well. I rarely ever go hunting but I believe we have the right to own one and the responsibilty to control it. I am for gun control but against a ban on guns. If they outlawed guns, would gun crimes really end? NO. It would just cause the criminals to have them and us good people no way for protection. I own a small gun and I keep it in a top drawer away from the reach of my daughter. I only have it there for self defense in case of an emergency.

Im pro gun control. Guns just cause problems...

Depends on the gun.

100% anti gun control, Take guns away from those who are willing to obey the law in order to get them and you leave them only in the hands of criminals.

I control my guns.

You're not taking my guns.

pro gun, just because theres assholes out there who shoot babies and their families doesnt mean i shouldnt have the right to carry a weapon,this world sucks now a days and i need protection and i like to hunt why should crooked politicians take food out of my kids mouths. the grocery store costs too much as it is and hunting is cheaper and if u kill it u eat it

Anti = no government intervention. My 2 cents.

I'm not for gun control, per se, but I believe that there should be some regulations imposed on the purchase and licensing of firearms. They're dangerous, man.

Im 100% guns guns are a right to bear arms

I'm pro-2nd Ammendment. Call me crazy, but I have a certain fondness for the Constitution....and the rights it affords us all.

I'm all for gun control. They already find their way into the wrong hands. Too many irresponsible people..that don't need guns.

I am for gun control... as in using both hands to control your gun. there is no question that the founding fathers intended private citizens to not have any difficulty haaving guns of their era. one would have to be on crack to think they intended citizens to own nuclear warheads. the only debate that should even exist is where to draw the line between them. I say the line should be no grenade launchers and no full automatics with a firing rate that could mow down a crowd (10 r/s) maybe. the only reason for full autos to be legal is because the founding fathers ensured the right to bear arms to allow the citicens the ability to revold should the government to become corrupt and whole town wielding semiautos would not stand a chance against a group of 4 hummers with 50 cal on top. however I would wager that our military (atleast our current one) would side with the people knowing that that is what our government is supposed to be for.

I am pro control and REASONABLE limitation but I am against prohibition. . So - I have no problem with people buying guns for recreation or protection - but they should take safety classes and or tests. And I have no problem with background checks. . I also don't think people should have unfettered rights to high power assault weapons and machine guns and tanks. But in the context of clubs - in well controlled firing ranges - why not? I've always wanted to own a Thompson SubMachine Gun. I'd be happy to keep it at a club where it's safely out of harm's way but where I could go and blast fedora wearing cardboard bad guys all day when I want.

I think that all guns should have ballistic tests before sale and this should be recorded in a national database with all other identifying factors of gun and owner. All potential gun owners should be required to go through thorough national criminal database checks, take serious classes in gun safety, gun laws, and proper conveyance and storage. They should have met some standard of proficiency on the firing range with each of their chosen weapons as well. Then they can receive ownership with a licence for their wallet stating that they are a gun owner and whether or not they have met the standards to carry a concealed weapon, a photo ID and description of the gun owner and a chip containing the serial numbers and description of all the guns the person owns including the ballistic results of each of the weapons. All of this information should be available to law enforcement on a national database. This will allow all competent law abiding citizens to own a gun and will efficiently track stolen weapons involved in crimes. Most states treat gun ownership as a privilege by not allowing felons to possess guns. So why not take this to it's logical conclusion and stop dealing with this issue in a half-assed chicken-shit way? Why not insist that gun owners be trained and educated in responsible gun use and ownership? Like driving a car, this should be treated as a privilege, not a right. The second amendment in this respect is archaic and should be updated.

ANTI. Gun control is tyrrany.

Anti gun control.

PRO!!!!

I am anti--criminal should have a chip implanted...police would know where they are at alltimes...a killer will use what ever, not only a gun and do not care about a permit or gun control...but with a chip,at least police know wish one is in the area...and with the eye in the sky they know exactly whats happening...

i'm all for it ... i've got a license or mine

Anti-gun control. Any hunters that wanna down-rate me, i've hunted with a bow and arrow before, it's difficult but you can do it, the native americans did.

I have mixed feelings here ... ... on the one hand, I want absolutely all firearms sales and all ammunition sales to be to only registered people, and I want the guns & ammo sales info tracked at all times ... and I want all dangerous & violent criminal offenders to have extreme restrictions ... ... but on the other hand, I still want firearms & ammo to be readily available with minimal delays, minimal hindrances for those with a clear clean record, and a minimal cost to the gun control methods and database management. ... I also see no reason for "hunters" to have assault rifles or machine guns ... a simple single shot, manual bolt action, with a 5 round magazine is good enough ... likewise shotguns do not need to be auto loading, a pump is adequate, in my opinion.

Pro. You say you need guns to protect yourself? Then how come the US has one of the highest murders/population rates? And yes, when I say murder, I mean all cases where one person kills another

pro gun

Get ready Kewl! I've been down this road! . I am all for guns when used properly! +5

Pro gun but with a caveat, everyone should be licensed and belong to a militia of some kind.

I am Pro Gun and own several .... It isn't the GUN that kills ; BUT the person handling the weapon ...... It is however; the gun owner's responsability to make sure that these guns are kept away from mentally disturbed people AND persons under 21 ...

pro i live in a place where they are needed.

pro-gun. I'm a nihilist and enjoy seeing people annihilate themselves. Guns are perhaps the most efficient, widely available means of massive killing ever devised.

I'm Pro-gun, but anti-idiotic gun owner.

pro gun like all good texans

I am pro potato gun. Hunters are fine. Those assault weapons and the sort. . .soldiers and cops. I don't see what Joe Shmoe needs with one. Anti-water guns, too. Damn kids!

Pro-gun.

I'm sort of both. I have no problem with responsible gun ownership, and have considered getting a concealed weapons permit. I do however, have a problem with assault weapons. The few people I've known that have had them have also had mental issues, which I think have contributed to their attraction to these weapons. That freaks me out a bit.

At last count I own 20 guns, my avatar is one of them, so..... :-)

anti-violence. Don't blame the tool Blame the action.

Depends on who's holding it.

I'm definitely pro Constitution, and that includes the right to own guns. Never forget there was a reason that right was made very clear in the beginning of our Nation's history. The only defense we have against becoming a police state is the fact that so many citizens are gun owners and know how to use them. The writers of our Constitution never had a thought about limiting gun ownership to hunters and with the recent increase of home invasion crimes, your only chance at survival may depend on having a loaded fire arm.

I am anti gun.I know my answer might not be popular but to me guns have no place in modern day society.

Neither. I am anti-guns-in-the-wrong-hands.

I am Pro-Gun, my dad and boyfriend both own guns - handguns as well as shotguns. I've fired guns. Guns do not kill people. The PEOPLE who are foolish, angry, drunk, stupid enough are the ones who kill. The guns are a tool, such as a knife is a tool used to kill.

pro-gun

pro-gun

I'M PRO, I THINK EVERYONE SHOULD LEARN TO HANDLE A GUN PROPERLY AND HAVE LOTS OF TRAINING BEFORE GETTING A LICENCE.

pro-gun if the bad guys have them then i want some too+5.

I say the more guns the safer that I am.....Pro-gun all the way.

Whatever keeps you safe!

Pro.

God, anti. I hate them. I live in a country where they aren't legal, and I wouldn't be comfortable being around them. And I definitely wouldn't feel comfortable being somewhere where ordinary people can own and use guns. Not a chance. Police, fair enough. In the countryside where they're actually needed, fair enough. Otherwise, no.

Anti ... A gun only provides one thing ... DEATH No positive can come from a tool that is built to take life before its natural time. Easy to say in the right hands guns are safe ... but why do the right hands need a gun? >>> To protect them from guns in bad hands? ... The bad which were perhaps once good ... Eitherway, good or bad, with gun in hand is designed for one purpose only. Perhaps psychological assessment should be mandatory for all gun permits along with tougher access (safe lock) requirements in place for those who qualify to gain permit inorder to prevent their children using dads gun to kill 30 of his or her innocent classmates on a bad day. If someones dad had been careless enough to allow his stressed out child to go to school and kill your little baby ... How would you feel? ... would you not want to shoot that stupid adult who never used that stupid gun anyway? (If you don't have children you would not understand this point so much) No offense intended by my comment, but this is what your gun has done so often ... Kill more innocent than bad. I have shot many guns myself at targets only, and I have had much enjoyment doing so ... Yet I am not so insecure that I need one under my pillow ... I would lose that short moment of enjoyment if it saved one childs life by it being permanently banned. Although a great part of history ... the Wyatt Earp Era has passed my friends ... time will change and the gun will fade ... Like dinasour politicians, it's an evolutionary process which will see them all gone from public use when we all begin to pull our heads from under the sheets. Peace without the gun :)

anti

Law enforcement agencies, together with our justice system, have proved time and time again that they are both unwilling and unable to apprehend and incarcerate the multitudes having criminal minds who obtain and use guns in their acts against society. It is virtually impossible to do. Such agencies do not, can not, enforce the hundreds of laws that are already on the books. Until such criminals do not pose a risk to my loved ones –and yours– in such large numbers –which will likely never be the case-- I will be pro gun ownership for those who would not use such a weapon in a criminal manner. I am a strong advocate for preserving the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. I am a proud member of the NRA. +5

Pro protecting my family & home. Anti ignorant, untrained gun owners.

Pro guns...anti bullets

Anti.only if guns were impossible to get but. We are left defenceless if someone confronts us with a gun so i might be pro gun aswell, so there are pros and cons for this question.