Statistics have shown that 3/4 of the 70+ mass murders and shootings for the last 30 years or so involved legal guns. Look at the UK. They\’ve got super strict gun laws and restrictions, and they have a murder rate that\’s 40 times lower than the US. As if that\’s not enough, Americans own over 300 million guns, and guns only make arguments and issues more violent. I rest my case. No, there shouldn\’t be ANY gun control
There can be gun regulation which is the background checking of people before owning a gun but no, there shouldn\’t be any limitations for guns, if a criminal wants to buy a gun, too bad, they blew their chance, just because a criminal did get his/her hands on a gun and killed people doesn\’t mean that the rest of the people who followed the rules should lose their rights too Yes, the right to own a gun is in our Constitution.
As long as the second amendment of the United States Constitution is present, there will always be guns in the hands of citizens. I believe that gun control laws should be severe and a person should go through a long process just to get a gun. But, if guns were limited or made illegal, the Bill of Rights would become void. There are already substantial restrictions on guns. I don\’t feel that amount of ammunition held in gun magazines, types of ammunition, or types of guns owned should be regulated. Most people who go about obtaining a gun, of any kind, go about it legally and there is never any incident. However, there are those who obtain guns without them being registered, who will cause harm. SINCE WHEN DO CRIMINALS OBEY THE LAW????!!! We\’ve allowed the culture of add more guns = literally every problem is solved go on so long that there has to be a limit, they can\’t at this point be outright banned.
They need to be restricted far more heavily than they are, but there has to be a middle ground that is met. Find it with responsible gun owners. the NRA can go to hell. I am an avid hunter. If it moves and there is a season, I will hunt it. I do however see no need to carry a gun and also think it is ridiculous for people to feel the need to have these guns where they can get high capacity magazines. The second amendment gives the people the right to bear arms in the event of needing to organize a militia because of no national army. It does not give people the right to carelessly wave them in the air and screaming their rights are being taken away. If you are forced to check your gun in at a gun show but want to be able to take one into a school, there is something very flawed with you as a human being.
Lastly, as to the argument that guns are necessary to for protection from government tyranny, as noted above, gun control does not mean taking away all guns. But more importantly, if there were some unprecedented battle of government versus civilians, what good would guns, even assault weapons do, against the United states military? The military has tanks, drones, aircraft carriers, missiles, cyber warfare capabilities, far-reaching surveillance, and more. In the arms race between government and civilians, civilians lost years ago. Background checks, a federal database tracking gun sales, or a ban on high capacity magazines are not going to change the equation.