In the meantime.. Keeping weapons, for me, is impractical...as it is for most.

this is like the alcoholic saying i should not drink therefore
you should not drink neither

Fair enough analogy.. With a few flaws though.

It is more like my saying.. As an alcoholic... Drinking alcoholically, might bring you to the same places I have gone. Places you do not want to go.

I am not against owning firearms. I do believe I still have a few registered to me.. Just not in my immediate possesion, and highly doubtful I will ever find a need to recover them.

YHowever.. It is my belief that even with the best training and preparedness.. Carrying a firearm is not a practical form of self defense for most, is highly impractical and actually might be detrimental.

It has never proven to be such to me, nor the 50 friends I know that do so. When you carry a gun you are more likely to be aware of your surroundings, and your responsibilities. You avoid places, and situations that you might ordinarily think twice about

i dont like guns full stop...but you can blame the tool...blame the people who use the tool..at the end of the day you can make anything a weapon..its the person using it thats the killer

True enough.

Realizing that this was an isolated circumstance. Yet not the only time I've seen someone miss their target completely or use an overpowered weapon.. Which tends to cause stray bullets flying around city blocks.

Several years ago.. I did first aid on a young man who was not able to respond to any sort of aid. He was caught in the head by a bullet shot from a handgun 3 blocks away, while walking with his young wife and children in a park by the river.
The weapon used was a legally owned 357 revolver. The bullet was intended for a threatening young man standing roughly 10 feet from the shooter.

I'm sure the wife and children understood the subtle differences between guns and people.

tragedy happens in all walks of life jist. Airplane crashes, car crashes, slip and falls, hand caught in the garbage disposal, falling of roofs, straining too hard on the toilet. What else do we regulate, and restrict to account for all the variables, and nerf the world for everyone.

So, we have a gun problem? Next thing, you'll be saying "Guns kill people".

I like your idea Single_Rob...mandatory that head of households be armed 24/7, but what about the little wifey? She should be armed, too.

i have the right to not bear arms.

Very true. Tragedy does happen all around us. For a variety of reasons. Both valid and not so valid.

We cannot possibly expect to protect us all from everything.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yet.. In an effort to be the devils advocate.. Please humor me for a minute.

How many things in our world are specifically designed to kill?
I know there are uses for firearms like hunting and hobby.. But weapons in a city? Chances are? They are not going to be used to feed your family, or protect them from the random wild boar roaming the streets. They are designed to take a life..when in that setting. Cars and trucks are not. Garbage disposals are not. Everything else in our world enhances our world in a completely separate way.

Considering the logic presented...

Why do we have such an issue with WMD's? Why should we be so afraid of people other then us having Nuclear capability or Chemical and Biological weapons? Many of them have multiple uses...

Why are we so pissed at those people for taking those Towers and the Pentagon? Were we supposed to protect them?

Even on a smaller yet just as deadly scale. Why do we control the domestic supply of ammonia nitrate? How come I don't hear anybody complaining about that? It actually has another purpose other then making truck bombs with it. We need it to fertilize our crops.

According to the logic presented? We should all call the families and friends of victims of the Oklahoma City bombing and 9/11.. and tell them 'Hey.. We are real sorry about your Mom, Dad, Son or Daughter not coming home... but we can't possibly be expected to Nerf the whole world...'

Then call our troops home, and everyone just amass as much food, fuel and armament as you possibly can...Turn our homes and small towns into fortresses....
We just take our chances then.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I defend myself and mine, just fine without a deadly weapon. There are plenty of weapons of opportunity around, should I need one.
Since I have surrendered my firearms.. I have been in more then a few altercations ~ where if I had one? I may have pulled it. Most everyone else who worked with me was armed and had weapons in their homes. Considering the work we did? I don't really blame them. I chose not to. Somehow.. I managed to survive it.
Trust me.. While denouncing my ability to apply deadly force simply by pointing and shooting.. I am far from a pacifist.

Using deadly force is not something that is easy.. and more often then not? Completely unnecessary.

i have the right to not bear arms.

weapons in a city setting do not automatically switch purpose to becoming a tool only to be used for killing. Firearms kept ny those who live in the city are often taken to country settings, or ranges for entertainment. If you do your research you will find a vast number of competition shooters live in an urban environment, does that mean they are training soley for the purpose of killing another huan being. The setting does not change the intent of the tool.

I don't have to research it. I'm fully aware of it. Yet somehow I'm thinking this arguement is not such a political topic simply because people want to go out and plink bottles off of fence rails or go on a hunting trip.
Is it so unreasonable to assume that the average person applying for a carry permit... Their primary purpose has nothing at all to do with entertainment?

and more power to you for excercising that right, just don't tell me I do not have the right to bear them because you choose not to

I support the right of people to bear arms.I feel gun laws keep honest people honest and criminals don't worry about laws.I still feel that first time owners who are non military or law enforcement should have to take a safety course on the proper storage(esp around children),not shooting the wrong peeps etc.Hunters do.

Every gun law on the books is unconstitutional. Gun regulation is strictly prohibited by the second amendment.

Although that is a popular way to interpret it.. The Federal Circuit Court, many legal and Constitutional historians would seem to historically have disagreed with you.

If it was so clear? Then why is it so clearly misunderstood?

There is no part in there that says the State cannot tell you what kind of weapons you can bear...and how you can bear it.

It merely says that it cannot infringe on your right to bear them. So long as you have a firearm? Your right to bear it is not infringed upon.

Considering the type of personal weapons available at the time the amendment was written... and the overall political and social climate of the land. I'm relatively sure that they lacked the foresight to see what kind of firepower we would start to see in the late 1800's to early 1900's.

Somehow I am reminded of those that read the Bible way too literally. Without taking into account the social and political climate of the time.