Is it because they are afraid a little child will find a loaded gun and kill his brother or sister? Is it because they are afraid that a disturbed person may turn the gun on himself and commit suicide? Is it because they are afraid that the robber with intent to harm deserves a fighting chance and a home owner with a gun would shoot back? Are they afraid that the home owner might shoot someone innocent by mistake?
I mean the criminals can find guns and weapons, and yet the one defending his home is left at the mercy of the thugs and the police might not get there in time.
So why is a homeowner in an isolated location left at the mercy of home invaders with no means to defend himself?
[question posted by suspenseful]responses and comments:
I think the fact that a lot of people act on impulse and could very kill someone in anger when they normally wouldn't and of course there is the kids getting hold ofthem...when you see kids taking guns to schools and killing at random it makes you wonder if it is wise to have these things out there... [lilaclady]
I suppose they could fix this by making sure that if you buy a gun, you should have a test of your mental fitness, and children should not take guns to school. I mean there are ways to make sure that crazies do not get the weapons and if a boy takes a gun to school and does not leave it at the office (assuming he is going hunting game after school with his dad) then the school should talk to the father and have him come to the school before it starts and hand the gun over to the principal who will release it afterwards to a responsible adult who will take the boy to the woods to meet his father. [suspenseful]
All those things that you have mentioned do happen too much. But I understand that in the countries that have gun control have other weapons that they have to worry about such as knives. I read somewhere that Japan was have trouble with increasing numbers of stabbings. And in some countries that baseball bats are being used to commit crimes. I guess they are catering to a special interest group. [deebomb]
Here in Canada we have stabbings and the usual beat someone up with a baseball bat, or a club, rather bloody and requiring much more extensive hospital treatment then repairing a bullet wound =the exception being being shot through the heart and I am thinking of the homeowner in an isolated area being unable to defend himself. I mean the police may get there too late. I wonder if the gun controllers belong in the one free kill for a murderer just as some believe a dog is entitled to one free bite. [suspenseful]
I think it has to do with safety. Putting guns in the hands of law and defense only makes a country safer. I live in Singapore. It has a very low crime rate and virtually have no guns at all. It can be done and Singapore is the best example to beat the gun lobby argument. [PreetSG]
At a city where there is not much crime, it can be done, but where there is a crime wave, it cannot be done. It depends on how much trouble and how good a police force it has. The thing is that if you have a good police force the citizens do not need guns, but if the police are few and far between and cannot get there or if they are corrupt take bribes, favor certain people, the citizens need the weapons to defend their homes. [suspenseful]
I'm a supporter of gun control. You only have to look at how many school shottings there have been in the US over the past few years to see the cost of no gun control. Having said this, the flow of guns to criminals must also be stopped. The arguement is if they have guns, then I need to have them also, so I can protect myself and my property. The debate will continue. The same arguement goes for countries. If they have neuks, then we need them in order to defend our country. One mad leader and we have a neuk war on our hands. [mipen2006]
When you have gun control, you are taking guns away from the citizens who want to defend themselves. Here in Canada under our formal Liberal government no one was doing anything to keep guns from criminals, they were going through houses and confiscating gun collections and guns from former veterans, because they figured that such collectors and veterans were calling up the Burglars and Home Invaders Society or the Criminal Union or the bad guys themselves and giving them maps to their places, where the key was hidden and where the guns and ammo is stored. And would it not be a good idea for the citizens to rise against this mad leader? After all he got into power because there was no one to oppose him. You see the government took away the citizens's right to defend themselves. [suspenseful]
They are only in favor of it because they think it will get them votes. There are more lives saved by guns than you would think but the media won't print or report the stories. Politicians are no better than prostitutes, they deal in lies and making people feel good. However, at least you know the goal of a prostitute and neither of you expects the other to believe any bullcrap. Politicians, on the other hand, will sell their own parents down the river for a vote. If anyone was really serious about stopping murders and injuries caused by people with guns, they would begin funding childhood education and nurturing programs, parenting classes, job development and health programs. People use guns to commit crimes because they have grown up not caring about anyone, they've been too busy trying to survive (for the most part) and being abused by their parents and the authorities. I've simplified this for the sake of space, but if we invest in our children we will see violence and misery substantially reduced within two decades. [dragon54u]
It is more than education and relieving poverty. It is the parents not being to tell the children when they are doing wrong and not giving into the blackmail where the child says, "you did it when you were my age, why can't I?" or "Johnny can stay up to watch Tv at ten pm, why not me?" You have to make the children take responsibility for their actions, because if they do not, then they will grow up to irresponsible adults and whose actions will hurt others. [suspenseful]
I think some of them mean well, but they mistakenly believe that the guns are to blame for gun accidents. In reality, it's the gun owner who allowed access to a child or other untrained person who is at fault. If people were responsible with guns these things wouldn't happen. I agree that making guns illegal only takes them out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. Criminals would still get them, which means they would be at an advantage and be able to terrorize people even more easily. What would stop them from breaking into a house when people are home when they know there is no gun there? It would make criminals bolder and therefore more dangerous. [Sillychick]
That is what concerns me. I live in a fairly safe neighborhood with everyone watching out for everyone else, but what if I was in an unsafe part of town. There is one area of our city where the insurance brokers will not touch because of the high crime rate and many of the bad guys there have access to guns. They do not invade the house just armed with baseball bats and knives, some of the have guns obtained illegally or they are Canadian aborigines who were allowed to use rifles and guns to hunt for food on their reservation but decide people are an easier game. So who protects against the predators when the criminals have the guns? [suspenseful]
Because they are afraid of another "Boston Tea Party" type protest over confiscatory taxes. This, might then lead to another revolution and an unarmed public is easier to control. [ElicBxn]
There was also a theory that he had a brain tumor. He wasn't know as a really friendly guy, but neither was he known as anti-social. I think he just wanted to go out in a "blaze of glory." Or, to quote from a sf short story that sticks in the head: "a blaze of glo..." [ElicBxn]
Guns have only one purpose namely to maim or kill human beings or an animal. Putting guns in the hands of civilians greatly increased the chance of deadly accidents. Most civilized countries except the USA have very strict gun controls for good reasons. In Canada we see a big gun problem in big cities, mostly because guns are smuggled in from the States. There is a shooting practically every weekend in Toronto and many times children or innocent bystanders are hurt. As far as people living is isolated rural areas are concerned, there is a possibility to obtain a permit for a weapon, also farmers and hunters have always had this option in Canada. So it is my opinion there should be stricter gun controls. The laws are different in the US because by their constitution they have the right to bear arms, but this document was drafted a long time ago and in postindustrial society it is totally outdated. [Lindalinda]
I do think it is the attitude of the people in the country. If they believe that guns are only for killing people then they will not want a gun because they do not want anyone to think they are cold=-blooded vicious killers, but if they believe that guns are to prevent a vicious killer from entering the house and killing everyone, they think of a gun as a protection. So it is the attitude of the population, but sometimes the attitude may be used for the wrong reasons. The government may take advantage of the people not being allowed to have weapons except to hunt food or on reservations to pass some laws they know the people will not like and they can send the police to arrest the opponents and make their will known. A people who have guns in their homes, may decide they do not like their ruler for a baseless reason and rise up against him. So it is the attitude of the person with or without a gum. OH I do not have an alarm system, but we have very noisy neighbors. In fact, we are all a bunch of snoops on this street. lol [suspenseful]
Many gun control arguments seem to based on myths and alarmist thinking. The vast overwhelming majority of gun owners are honest, careful and respectful of the responsibility of owning one. Accidents happen but they also happen in cars. They happen with Kitchen knives. They happen with power tools. And in far greater numbers than guns and often with equally lethal results. Can we realistically create a bubble around ourselves and protect ourselves form everything that can possibly go wrong? Vastly more high school kids are killed in car accidents every year than have in the entire history of our country in school shootings. Yet cars are legal. Even more are killed in drunk driving accidents and yet alcohol is legal. Drugs are ILLEGAL and yet how many high school kids die every year as a result of them? I'm not advocating the legalization of drugs by any means but it demonstrates my point. Bad things happen and misfortune ignores laws or lack of. [xfahctor]
In Winnipeg, lots of the killings are knifings and beatings with clubs. Then there are the kids who drink booze and run over people, the drunk driver, etc. In the country, people use rifles to hunt food, and to protect themselves, but there are just as dangerous humans in the city. Yet the homeowner in these dangerous areas can only use a kitchen knife or call the police. Gun control will not stop crime, but stricter sentences will. [suspenseful]
For whatever crazy reasoning behind it, our politicians believe that if there is stricter gun control laws fewer criminals will have guns! Except for one thing, they seem to overlook the fact that criminals do not buy their guns legally! They will still obtain weapons no matter what gun control is put in place. I do know that my home will have protection, no matter what gun control they try to put in place. I do believe in our right 'to bear arms'! [palonghorn]
That is what I feel. The bad guys will always get guns, and with gun control, the innocent citizens cannot protect themselves. Look what is happening in Washington DC, they do not want the home owner to protect himself. It makes me wonder who the officials are in bed with, maybe they are supported by organized crime. [suspenseful]
I think it is the spirit of some people today. Actually, a lot of people. The USA is being turned upside down. It seems to favor its' enemy. Everything we do here is to benefit someone else. Our country does not protect its' own people. Look at the court system. I have seen obviously guilty people get away with murder. Our country seems to favor helping people who do not help themselves. Gun control is just a part of all that. It's called liberalism. [Yestheypayme2dothis]
I think it was that glove incident, They wanted to show that OJ never used the glove so they feign like someone who had arthritis or what my husband has a stroke was putting it on and of course they could not. They did not put on the glove like a normal person would. He could make it fit. [suspenseful]
Not to mention the huge increase in mental illnesses and therapy needed if they banned guns; the need for compensatory penis substitutes is obviously high, and not everyone can afford expensive foreign sports cars. [Wolfechu]
i think some people dont have control on their anger so in anger they can kill anybody...even innocent people...!! [luverboydipin]
I suppose if they could have a test done as to mental fitness, then that would eliminate the problem, but why was not the test done for the criminals? I mean they could have a questionnaire that would trip someone up who was planning to take revenge on someone for real and not be wishful thinking. And why should a homeowner who wants to protect his home be considered a worse candidate for having a gun then the bad guy who wants to rob banks? [suspenseful]
I dont know why they do it they just do and when here they were asked to bring their guns in some stupid people did! and then most tof them got itto the hands of the criminals . How is that that they werent distroyed like they said they would be. makes no since to me that any one in their right moind would give up their guns. I have a holder that holds coke cans or beer can that say : Ya you can have my gun Bullets first! Whwen owning a gun you do have to have a safe place for them so a kid dont get ahold of it ,but also you train the kids that it is for protectin only and they dont SHow it to any one. I have 3 pistols and a shotgun and they are staying in my house! [Lakota12]
true that was silly bet his father didnt take out the fireing oin! Need something more than a knife to defend home and body with! [Lakota12]
its because gun is not a toy. we must learn how to understand how gun dangerous is. [z1mzAm82]
But does that mean a homeowner, especially in an isolated area has to let himself be killed by criminals because they have guns and he does not and the police are too far away? [suspenseful]
See? There you go thinking that as a Canadian you have some rights of some sort. You don't. Anything you have is at the consent of Parliament, and Parliament alone. The Charter of Rights guarentees you rights that can be revolked at anytime. So, criminals have laws governing their activities. Ask Stockwell Day, the Minister of Public Safety. he will tell you that there are laws in place that prohibit ownership and carrying of hand guns. That home invasions are illegal. Drug trafficing is illegal.... There are laws against these activities. There needs to be a children insurance plan in place to protect the innocent. The fact that they are unenforcable means absolutely nothing. But there are laws in place. And our governemnt does not want you armed because, if ever you and the rest of the law abiding sheeple realize that Canada is founded on a house of cards, you may want to take over and have something that does not benefit you. And you wioll be able to take it by force. That's also why the Brits are unarmed as well. You my dear are the property of the Parliament of Canada. THEY OWN YOU. And as long as you obey their rules, you will be prey to those who don't or won't. Feel better now? (This is why I'm going political) [BCMike]
I already figured that out. And yet they want me to pay taxes. I knew the reason they made the gun control laws was so if they passed an illegal or immoral law, then no one could oppose them. It was not a coincidence that after they made gun control stricter that they passed the law enforcing same-sex marriage and put homosexuality on the protected hate crime list and passed the hate crime law. As I wrote before, coincidence? I think not. [suspenseful]
Gun control is one of those things that could be argued until the end of time. The problem is both sides are right to some degree. I absolutely should have the right to protect my home and that right extends to the responsible ownership of one or many firearms. On the other side of the fence... Why do we feel it necessary to keep things around the house that could kill us. Both sides make a good argument. Guns are stupid things. They are devices designed for one purpose only... TO KILL! In a perfect world I would love to see them all destroyed. News Flash!!! We don't live in a perfect world people to carry firearms and some of those people are dangerous. There is a good reason that we have the right to keep firearms. Consider the dangers of removing all firearms from the public. If the country were to be invaded we be at a serious disadvantage. Even grandpa's old shotgun works a hell of a lot better against invading forces than a slingshot. Criminals will still have guns. Drug dealers and pimps aren't exactly buying there guns at the local Bass Pro Shop now. The Government will still have guns. This would be a scary situation. The government and criminals are walking around with guns while the rest of us have no means to protect ourselves. The Constitution was written by people that just got done picking up there hunting weapons and forming a revolution so they would be able to protect themselves from a harsh government and win independence from that government. I believe a responsible citizen keeps a firearm. Not just for the protection of their family from criminals and invading armies but to keep our own government in check. The right to keep firearms is one of the checks and balances that we have in this country. It's part of the whole concept of a balance of power. Now what we need to institute in this country is Illegal Gun Control. More money is spent every year trying to change laws to keep Joe Citizen from owning this particular type of firearm etc... that if we took that money and instead invested it in our border patrol and customs departments we could almost illuminate not only illegal firearms coming in from other countries but illegal immigrants and in many cases illegal drugs. This solution is way to simple and wouldn't make sense to a politician. [tennesseejed]
People have to be able to defend themselves. Look at what is happening in Canada. They were able to pass two immoral laws because they made sure the citizens who did not like these laws would not be able to use force to stop it. Once you have gun control in place, then the government can seize your home, your money, throw you in jail, and take your freedom away. [suspenseful]
I personally believe that in the United States everyone should have to right to have a gun for protection or for hunting. However, I believe that there should be a waiting process, background check, and anything else necessary to ensure that the gun is not going to be used in the act of killing another human being. My dad and brother hunt so I have grown up with guns and I am in favor of safety as well. [shell1986]
That is a good idea. It is not right to assume that decent citizens are just going to use the guns to get their own way and to fatten their properties by criminal activities. I live in Canada and our gun control has not worked. We had two horrible laws passed after they made it stricter. And I read once that once a State enacts gun control, it is well on the way to tyranny. [suspenseful]
My country is a very big country with great population and there are a lot of ethnic groups, the political demands are differet a lot. It is dangerous to allow people have guns. Even shotgun has been baned. We feel safe because there is no threat of being shot. [lixiaos77]
It would be safer, but are you not afraid that your government might make it a bit unsafe? I mean with all the guns in their control and they turned worse, there would be no way to protect yourself. [suspenseful]
I don't think a homeowner in an isolated location can defend himself with a gun or even a missile. Home invaders can kill him with a knife or even a rope, in anytime he can't figure out. The truth is, the crime rate of those gun control country is really relatively low. [harrywood]
Home invaders can easyly get guns too if there's no gun control. But homeowners can't hold a gun 24 hours a day. [harrywood]
I'm pretty ignorant regarding the laws of different countries, suspenseful, but I thought that in America people have the right to keep guns in their home for protection. I believe the problems arise when the guns are taken out of the home. It is true that many people do not know how to properly care for and operate guns and should be educated. Any responsible person should have the right to own a gun for the protection of their home. I shudder when I think of a world wherein everyone is armed to the teeth and not in full control of their tempers. Sure, the criminals will always have access to guns, but if the private citizens keep guns in their homes that can at least make the criminals think twice before entering a home intent on robbing them.happy [worldwise1]
Well do they not have tests to see if someone is mentally fit to use a gun? I mean some of the questionaires I had to fill out when they were trying to find out what career I was suited for was very tricky and would they not want the gun in the hand of a citizen in trying to protect his family in an area where there are hardly any police then in the hands of criminals? And why assume that all people are crazies? [suspenseful]
I don't think the problem is with defending yourself. The problem is with the lethality of guns. If you wanted to defend yourself, get a baseball bat or mace. No one is going to go firing off a gun when they can't see. I think. I had one really scary experience with a gun when I was watching my little brother. He thought my stepfather's rifle was a toy for Christmas and pulled it out of the closet. I was so scared I nearly peed myself. Luckily, he was a little kid and could be distracted with ice cream. Thank God. Since then, I have been in favor of gun control. This sort of thing happens everyday in American and little children end up shooting themselves. Not that I was big in favors of guns before this, but it really changed my opinion. [cripfemme]
Not everyone is going to have a can of mace on hand, when an attacker comes after them and if that attacker happens to be a 250 lb football player, he will grab the bat out of your hand. And guns should be out of the reach of children. Your stepfather should have put the rifle where he could not get it. [suspenseful]
In America, the first amendment states that everyone should have a loaded gun. Here in Canada things are different. I hunt, so I need a rifle. I do not need a handgun for any reason and are only good for a shooting range so whats the point? Protection you say? If someone is dumb enough to break in my home while I am here, I dont need a gun. My sword will make short work of the idiot. America has more gun related deaths than most countries combined. There is never a need for anyone other than the military to own an automatic weapon. Handguns should also be banned too. [night71]
The trouble is I do not have a sword. We do have kitchen knives, a couple of saws, hammer, axes, and visas, but you see, they would make a mess when I make short work out of the vicious killer who invaded our home. My husband cannot move fast since his stroke. And guess who would have to clean up the blood and gore left after the decapitation of the psychopathic killer? Me? A gun would be handier. He could take one look at me pointing it at him and run the other way. [suspenseful]
It is because most politicians think they are smarter than you and me. These politicians think that only the state should be armed because the state has more knowledge on how and when to use a gun. This attitude can be applied on a long host of issue, from when they outlaw certain foods to what kind of car you can drive. Most law obeying citizen uses their firearm peacefully, and correctly. My question is why is it when a criminal commits a gun crime the law obeying citizen are the one that has to be punished? [gewcew23]
That is what happens in Canada. When they first made our gun control laws tougher, there was a man who was a gun collector and there was a whole newspaper about the " dirty scum" who dared to have guns in his house, oh and precious little about the poor criminal who had no other choice than to take a gun to commit a robbery. why he was almost a victim and I am sure many of our liberal leaders at the time where crying their eyes out. [suspenseful]
I don't agree with too much gun control, because criminals will get guns no matter what if they want one. I don't really think the government cares so much about the individuals getting shot, but guns start movements. Revolutions are a little more difficult to have if you only have sharp objects, because our military now-a-days can just use their guns. I think one of the main reasons is because the government is trying to protect themselves, and suppress violent movements for change. The less guns out there for the public, the more control they have over us. You can pick on a person without a gun, but if they don't have a gun, it makes it a little more difficult wouldn't you say? lol [sugarplum9084]
What is there to stop once gun control is in place then the government to throw all dissenters in jail? [suspenseful]
Gun control doesn't mean people can't have guns. It requires that they register them and have them legally and take some responsiblity. In some communities (Philadelphia for one) they are trying to limit the number of guns registered to one person to one per month. That doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Anyone living in such isolation and fear that they would need more than 12 guns a year to keep their family safe should consider moving for the sake of that family. [irisheyes]
I agree, there is no need to have that many guns in your home. I think they are just worried about people putting guns in their name, and then giving them to felons who are unable to get the guns. [tlb0822]
Hi suspenseful, I have always felt that guns get you into trouble, not out of it. I would never have a gun in my house, and my three grown children, all with families of their own, feel the same way. I could never sleep comfortable knowing that there was a gun in the house. Many years ago I had an uncle living in the US, whose wife was a Policewoman and sometimes my uncle wound be on the road for days, even weeks at a time. She once told me that when my uncle wasn't home she would sleep with a loaded gun by her bed. I will never forget the feeling it gave me. What a terrible way to live! I guess it's just that we all think differently, but I could never understand anyone wanting to carry a gun. Blessings. [Pose123]
Governments feel they have to "take care" of people. I think they get this idea from people. People want free health care, entitlement programs, no responsibility and to still keep their rights. That is not how that works. It is a trade off. I personally prefer responsibility and rights as opposed to entitlements. [laglen]
the question is who created this stupid invention? [psphacker]
I think that the majority of gun holders have them for personal protection and are responsible, rational adults. I mean...yes there are worries that a child may get a hold of them. Well if you do a little bit of extra vigilence and put the gun up and have a working safety on it then it shouldn't be a problem. I think that a person has the right to defend themselves in there home. There have been a lot of break-in's around our home, so my fiance took me to shoot his gun so I would know how to use it. I'm sorry but if someone is dumb enough to come in to my house, and is able to get past my two very large dogs.. then they are a threat to me and my family. Criminals are going to find weapons no matter what the government does. Preventing people from protecting their homes is just ridiculous. [tlb0822]
Because it is easier than addressing the various social problems that are the real cause of violence and death (with or without guns). [huswyf]
I guess that is it. Parents will let their children get away with anything and will not lay down the law and then you have spoiled brats who think that if they do not get their own way will gravitate to guns and violence. [suspenseful]
I think there should be strict controls on who can own a gun yes, i don't know what you have to do for a license in they USA. But there should be tests for mental stability or whether they are a hardened criminals etc. But you guys (and girls lol) should NEVER let your government take your guns from you! If they take your guns it makes it easier to take away the rest of your rights. [TheNeverMan]
That is what is happening in Canada. As soon as they made people register even their hunting rifles, then they passed the same-sex marriage law. Coincidence? I think not. [suspenseful]