Originally Posted by Smitty79

Everyone shouldn't have one. But gun safety and basic marksmanship should be taught in school. Too many people vote against gun rights because they are ignorant of guns. They think that guns some how reach out and hurt people all by themselves.

An excellent point!

I voted no...
You can't hand someone a wrench and make them a mechanic ...
Or hand them a gun and make them a shooter ...

I voted yes, mainly because I defend the idea that every citizen should start out with the same basic right to own the implements necessary to provide for his own self defense.

Obviously, there are people out there who lack the competence to be a responsible gun owner. Whether they have undocumented criminal tendencies, undiagnosed mental problems, or are just too stupid to be trusted with potentially dangerous machines, there are always going to be some of them out there wreaking havoc on polite society, with guns, automobles, kitchen appliances, workshop tools, or whatever.

The problem is that a country that guarantees individual freedoms always has a government that suffers from the same maladies as any other government, in any other country - corruption and incompetence. Mostly, the people who actually want positions of power, within the government, are the very people who should not have them, because they usually believe in their own superiority, and because they tend to have agendas that don't necessarily appeal to or benefit the majority.

What that means, relative to this subject, is that the people who we would naturally look to, to judge the competency of a citizen to have a gun, cannot be trusted to make honest and informed judgements, and can usually be counted on to make decisions that will do more to serve their personal agendas than to protect the individual freedoms of the people they purport to be representing. Most of them rise to such high positions through clever media skills and poll-watching expertise, rather than through any specific qualifications or experience that they possess. In other words, they are often wrong, or dishonest, in their assessments, because their first priority is furthering their own agendas.

So, in my opinion, every adult who wants a gun should be allowed to buy one, until such time as it can be shown, through his own actions or behavior, that he is a danger to others. Obviously, that means we are going to continue to have tragedies at the hands of these kinds of folks, as we always have. But no government can improve that situation without undermining the liberties of the majority, who have done nothing to disqualify themselves from gun ownership. That is just a sad fact that we have to live with and adapt to, if we are to keep our individual freedoms. We cannot trust political opportunists to make 'preventive' laws, because they rarely work, and because every potential human failing cannot be anticipated and prepared for.

You will never hear me say, "There ought to be a law..."

Originally Posted by Bisley

I voted yes, mainly because I defend the idea that every citizen should start out with the same basic right to own the implements necessary to provide for his own self defense.

So you voted yes, but meant no. The question was should everyone have a gun, not should everyone have the right to own a gun. Two very different questions.

I voted no. Far too many idiots in the world. In my opinion of course.

I don't think that I want the leftist gangster on the road next to me to have a gun. Only republicans should have guns.(Just kidding, although I've heard worst ideas...)

Originally Posted by SMann

So you voted yes, but meant no. The question was should everyone have a gun, not should everyone have the right to own a gun. Two very different questions.

Thanks for explaining that to me. Your reading comprehension is obviously superior to mine.

Answering the question, as asked, results in answers that seem to suggest the opposite of what I wanted to say.

I voted 'other' because this is not a straight yes or no question.

At the federal level I vote yes, all people should at least have the right to acquire, keep and bear arms whether or not they choose to actually have one or not.

At the state, county, and municipal level I say no, because people through their actions may prove themselves incapable of upholding that right, just as many at that level prove themselves incapable of the privilege of driving an automobile.

As the density of population increases in urban areas, interaction and conflict are the natural result. For the well being of the public domain, I can see situations where individual rights to carry a firearm may not be in the best interests of all involved. Las Vegas comes to mind, too much booze and too much aberrant behavior to trust everybody to play nice.

That's why in Las Vegas I always left mine in a lockbox bolted to the floorboard of my truck. Get a half hour out of Vegas in any direction and a handgun for varmint control is just practical common sense.

Unless you are prepared to accept the responsibility and investment of time and money learning how to effectively use it, secure it and retain it, no.

Originally Posted by plp

At the state, county, and municipal level I say no, because people through their actions may prove themselves incapable of upholding that right, just as many at that level prove themselves incapable of the privilege of driving an automobile.

As the density of population increases in urban areas, interaction and conflict are the natural result. For the well being of the public domain, I can see situations where individual rights to carry a firearm may not be in the best interests of all involved. Las Vegas comes to mind, too much booze and too much aberrant behavior to trust everybody to play nice.

So, the solution is to restrict the rights of people who behave responsibly, because some irresponsible person might carry while drinking and start shooting?

That is exactly the same mindset liberal politicians have, in the current controversy.

I would think that it would be more reason to carry.....

Originally Posted by plp

I voted 'other' because this is not a straight yes or no question.

At the federal level I vote yes, all people should at least have the right to acquire, keep and bear arms whether or not they choose to actually have one or not.

At the state, county, and municipal level I say no, because people through their actions may prove themselves incapable of upholding that right, just as many at that level prove themselves incapable of the privilege of driving an automobile.

As the density of population increases in urban areas, interaction and conflict are the natural result. For the well being of the public domain, I can see situations where individual rights to carry a firearm may not be in the best interests of all involved. Las Vegas comes to mind, too much booze and too much aberrant behavior to trust everybody to play nice.

That's why in Las Vegas I always left mine in a lockbox bolted to the floorboard of my truck. Get a half hour out of Vegas in any direction and a handgun for varmint control is just practical common sense.

Voted (other), Not sure that everyone "should" own a gun. I'm pro 2nd ammedment all the way but there are folks that for one reason or another do not need to own a gun. If they qualify lawfully and can pass proficiency testing and voluntarily want a gun good. But only if they want a gun, "should" should not mean mandatory.