Here is my opinion on gun laws what do you think?

by **dennie18** » Sat Jul 21, 2012 11:12 am

It is coming from an American, just to let you know, because I hate when other people especially Canadians try to judge America.

I think that guns should not be carried around on everyday activities. But I think Americans should have access to guns in case of emergency (something like America is invaded or another civil war) not for petty crimes like the Dark Knight massacre. Do you really want several people shooting in the dark at once??? All the casualties!!! Guns should be kept in some sort of shelter or heavily guarded gun facility (we could build them) in every county and borough in every major city. I think there should be a local squad or military squad with people originally from that city (so they have ties) guarding these gun facilities, so that during a major threat people won't be denied gun access or won't be allowed guns for thing like terrorist attacks. These gun facilities should be either state or city governed/commanded/ owned (if those are the right words). For different threats like (the government is being oppressive), people should have a semiautomatic Uzi on lock down in the safest part of their home. When I say lock down I mean the gun should be in an electronic container for which you have to pass a built in (not online to avoid it getting hacked), randomized psychological test in order to unlock. I know we have that type of technology. For extreme need-it-now situations (like the military is invading your home under oppressive government) the glass on the container should be able to break with strong (adrenaline boosted) force. When the glass has been broken, then moment you touch the gun you should receive a painful electric shock (because if you really need it you won't feel it).

People can use things like knifes, machetes, tomahawks, and other blade based weapons for things like street fights, road rage, burglary, robbery, and self defense. It'd be a lot safer, you can actually run or stand a chance against it.

The word "regulated" is in the second amendment, and that's how it should be.

by **condan** » Sat Jul 21, 2012 11:18 am

Some countries have that setup. It does not work it places guns in the hands of criminals more than you think. Besides that would affect my safety if I'm shot at I will shoot back.

by **broehain61** » Sat Jul 21, 2012 11:35 am

I agree but people like the NRA and other gun group will cry oh that too much government.

by **ludano17** » Sat Jul 21, 2012 11:48 am

"Regulated" at the time of the Constitution meant well armed.

by **gall** » Sat Jul 21, 2012 12:02 pm

I would like to invite you to live in some places I have been. You have alot to say, but little experience. My 45 under my pillow has helped me sleep at night. It has kept the bad guys away.

I wonder what you have under your pillow, fuzzy bunny

by **valentino** » Sat Jul 21, 2012 12:04 pm

Our forefathers needed guns to protect themselves from their own government. What you are suggesting is that there be a facility that would have guns but they would be handed out only in an emergency. Who do you think would be handing them out? And who do you think would have access to them? That's right, the government. We need guns to protect ourselves from our own government if the need be. Gun laws only hurt law abiding citizens.

Advertisments:

Useful Links: