Quote:
Originally posted by Strange Famous
It's interesting that you used the same metaphor that Prince Philip did after the murder of 20 school children in the town of Dunblane by a gun maniac...
Personally, the argument for outlawing certain weapons to me is that they make violence much more easily. Guns, for example, create the possibility of an argunent turning into a murder, and so do swords.
The fact that so much violent crime exists to me is the proof that there is a requirement to disarm the people... people simply must not be allowed to own weaponary. of course, someone who wants to kill will always be able to do it, what you aim to reduce is the instances of people who do not really mean to kill, just to menace or threaten or fight, becoming killers because of the weaponary they use.
|
The gun debate always seems to get led into an argument over what would be better for society (aka the state), both sides arguing over weather their ideas are going to reduce crime or increase crime or will there be an increase or decrease in firearm accidents etc. What should be discussed instead is weather a person should have the right to arm themselves for defense and what would be considered reasonable to defend oneself. We obviously dont want people to be able to go to a local gunshop and purchase a nuclear weapon, but can we tell someone its not reasonable for them to own an AK47 for self defense and protection for their family?
Its a dangerous world, just as it was for the caveman in his day. For all our technology and knowledge the world is dangerous enough that I think its reasonable for a person to arm themselves for protection. I dont think you can disarm the people today and leave them with reasonable means to protect themselves or their family. Guns cannot be disinvented and bad people will always have them.
When the argument is made this way I think it becomes clear pretty quickly that disarming the public is not something that a government should have the power to do (at least in the US). The Bill of Rights recognizes the fact that the world is hazardous and the government is unable to ensure the safety of its citizens. Disarming the people is removing somones ability to defend their life should the need arise.