Here
and
Now

opinions

Americans and guns: It's complicated

10 Comments
By LISA MARIE PANE

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

10 Comments
Login to comment

Protection is on the list, but not near the top for why we have firearms. Going hunting and target shooting is part of our family culture.

If I lived in an inner city or in a dangerous location, perhaps my views on firearms would be different and "protection" would be higher. I don't know. Most of my neighbors have firearms and that doesn't bother me in the least. I don't mind most police or military having firearms, so why would I be afraid of my fellow Americans doing the same?

I have zero issue if cities want to restrict where loaded firearms are allowed.

I don't have any issue with background checks for firearm purchases or having people under psychological treatment being prevented from all firearm use and ownership. No fly list is a different matter. Lots of names are on that list without any due process. A friend with a common name is on that list - well, his name is on the list. No way to have it removed. He was forced to change jobs over it, since it was too much hassle to fly.

A government list of normal firearm owners - no way. That just makes it easier to round up all the patriots exercising their 2nd amendment rights. That right is the same as the right to free speech and freedom from religion.

There is already a govt list for restricted weapons and mandatory notification with local police for those sorts of weapons.

I see most firearms like fishing poles. It is a way to get dinner when camping and have meat for a few weeks.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

It's not complicated at all. Anyone who thinks they 'need' a gun, let alone 21 or more, is a fool.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

The right to bear arms is more important then the right to live.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

The 2nd Amendment was written for a fledgling country with no standing army, to ensure that it could rapidly conscript citizens (who would bring their own guns) when necessary. It has little relevance in a nation with the most lavishly armed military in the world. It has nothing to do with ensuring that citizens can "fight back against government tyranny." It does not enumerate the type or number of weapons that a citizen may own, because there weren't so many to choose from in 1789.

I'm all for citizens being allowed to own 1 bolt-action hunting rifle and 1 pump-action shotgun. That's all anyone logically needs. Handguns are unnecessary.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

The American political system allows for the unfettered misuse of lobbying funds, what in most countries would be called bribery. Gun manufacturers spend a fortune controlling politicians. Likewise, the oil industry funds and controls politicians. Thus, the USA is the only industrialized country without a functioning high speed rail system - the oil lobby won't allow it.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

300 million plus guns owned by an minority not a majority of the people. Guess my family are the one-third of households who haven't lived with firearms.

The right to kill overrides the right to live.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

When I were a young lad, I remember my Uncle's pal showing me his weapons and ammo room. It was like some kind of shrine. Fascinating and frightening, at the same time.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Some 89 percent supported preventing the mentally ill from buying guns...

So, who are the 11% that don't want to prevent the mentally ill from buying guns? ...the mentally ill?

...and 84 percent of all adults supported background checks for private sales and at gun shows.

...same logic applies here: if you are someone who does not support background checks, then surely you must be someone with... a background.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

"I see most firearms like fishing poles. It is a way to get dinner when camping and have meat for a few weeks."

I have never heard of a mass fishing pole massacre at a school before or any where for that matter...

As someone else had said, when this was originally put forth, a need for guns was present. That is no longer the case in the broader scope. Also if you want a ball and musket that takes 30 seconds or longer to load between shots as was the case back then, go ahead! Enjoy!

In all seriousness though, if we were only allowed one hunting rifle per adult (or slightly younger age for sake of hunting as a family), one shot gun for home defense (same reason and age requirements for hunting purposes) and one revolver/pistol per adult (children should never need a pistol PERIOD) things would not be so bad. 

But some want more and more and want military grade weapons with attachments and insane amounts of ammo. We can carry firearms that can shoot repeatedly and accurately over 300 meters, yet every day normal citizens are hassled over a 6 inch knife... Crazy!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I like our system.

Ownership licences are easy as is home-defense, but weapons can't leave the property.

Sports and hunting licences are separate.

Not all types/calibres are legal

Carry licences are tough 1 out of 5-6 gets approved, open carry/fully visible only

Most Taxi drivers don't have one.

My country bans all hidden/conceiled weapons like cane swords, etc.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites