Right to bear weapons, Wake up call?

[Richard]

Well I'm sure most of you saw what happened monday. 23 years old, Seung-Hui Cho, bought 2 guns, 1 in frebuary and the other on march and several clips of ammo without much of a hassle. Then monday went to his school, Virginia tech and killed 32 people, then committed suicide. The guy was crazy, it was obvious, even his teachers said it when they saw his written works, yet everyone decided to do nothing about it until it was too late.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18209746/

Now, today a gunman kills a person and then commits suicide at Johnson Space Center, NASA.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18233965/

So, Does this seem to you like a wake up call or no? When the constituton was first written the continental congress put that every citizen had the right to bare arms, But that was over 200 years ago. Why the hell would people need to have a gun now? It is not like Some indian tribe is going to raide you village or some bandits will attack your house.
So, should congress amend this part of the constitution? Does it make any sence at all for civilians to bare any kind of firing weapon?

[Elvain]

as I am oponent to this "right" I think every right has some limits.

I think that also to get driving license you have to prove you have abilities to get it (at least here). I don't understand why in USA you don't need to prove it (psychical ability) to get weapon. At least at the moment when the US advocate this right by defending their private property...

There are IMO many more arguments against it, but I think we already discussed them once. I can accept that the ones who need it for their feeling of safety let them have the gun at home IF they are not completely mad. And they should prove their psychical ability to own weapon in periodical examinations

[catt]

I think the problem is more complex. The 2nd amendment is not about Indians attacking you out in the middle of nowhere. It was mainly created so that people could defend themselves against a abusive government. It was very much created under the impression of the French Revolution.

Of course it is very arguable that the right to bear arms has that effect at all.

It's funny how this is always brought up when shootings happen. Every year many many people die because some idiot is trying to shoot deer in his backyard or because children play with the guns daddy's got laying around at home. Those are MANY more than are killed in actual shootings:
- From 1997-2002, more than 1,324 children were killed in firearm accidents.
- In 2004, there were 13,846 kids injured by a firearm -- and an additional 15,214 kids were injured from BB or pellet guns.
- The overall firearm-related death rate among U.S. children aged less than 15 years was nearly 12 times higher than among children in 25 other industrialized countries combined.
need more? (http://www.kidsandguns.org/study/fact_file.asp)

So yeah, why is everybody allowed to just have guns laying around at home? Very obviously they are doing a lot more harm than good. I don't think you should forbid arms per se, but there should be regulations (what Elvain suggested).


<offtopic>

However, this will not prevent such shootings. If you want to have a gun, you can get one, no matter whether it's allowed or not. It just won't be as easy but if you are determined, you'll surely work something out.

What we need to do to prevent such shootings is look critically at our society. We have to ask ourselves why people do not value the life of others. We have to speak openly about violence, even if it is "just" mobbing. Often we just close our eyes and don't wake up until it's too late... just to go straight back to sleep.

In the end, even with a good dialog in society we won't be able to prevent such things. Which is not surprising, don't our leaders show us every day that a human life is worth nothing as long a it stands in between you and a good place to drill for oil?

</offtopic>

[Angryminer]

The american constitution gives every civilian the right to own weapons to defend themselves against the rule of wrong leaders.
Since they, correctly, didn't elect to use them to defend themselves against the rule of wrong leaders I don't think there is any use for them, is there?
(There are other means of solving problems then shooting at each other!)

As far as I can see the main use of guns is to cause accidents. Guns don't protect people. You can't help anyone by owning or using a firearm. If you think about it, the sole possession of a firearm increases your propability of being shot at by someone who thinks you're going to shoot him.

Angryminer