|
| 31 Jul 2012 02:03 PM |
Do you feel comfortable allowing children to attend schools with lethal weapons? Should every kid have the right to carry around lethal weapons such as powerful guns and knives at school?
After all, the second amendment gives us the right to bare arms. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 02:04 PM |
| The second amendment was also written over two hundred years ago. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 02:05 PM |
| Its not bare arms everywhere as far as i know. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 02:06 PM |
| If you think something written 200 years ago is relevant to todays society then you need a reality check. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
AeLiSTaS3
|
  |
| Joined: 02 Jan 2010 |
| Total Posts: 4918 |
|
| |
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 02:06 PM |
| Doesn't matter. This is Murikuh! We don't need them liberal hippies trying to take guns away from our young school children while they are in the classroom! The right to bare arms is the right to bare arms. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
AeLiSTaS3
|
  |
| Joined: 02 Jan 2010 |
| Total Posts: 4918 |
|
| |
|
AeLiSTaS3
|
  |
| Joined: 02 Jan 2010 |
| Total Posts: 4918 |
|
| |
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 02:07 PM |
| M-m-m-m... MMMMURIKUHHHHH!!! |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 02:08 PM |
| but waht if dere comz a shooter to skoolz when they startz toh shoots everiwan kan self difens rait gais?!? and thats like so much safer |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 02:10 PM |
| They need to have guns so that they can protect themselves from the other children that have guns! More guns = More safety, right guys? Yes. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 02:16 PM |
DrConservative is liek so rite dud
No, really, if that is the case, then fear should be the only thing that's stopping them to have a total-out war. I say no guns at all!
☜▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬☜☆☞▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬☞ - Candymaniac, a highly reactive substance. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 02:17 PM |
| It would be interesting, shooter starts shooting in class, situation is unclear, someone takes down shooter and someone thinks they are the shooter and shoots them etc etc |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Boeing717
|
  |
 |
| Joined: 08 Jun 2008 |
| Total Posts: 70007 |
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 02:18 PM |
"If you think something written 200 years ago is relevant to todays society then you need a reality check."
There have been written laws against murder for about as long as there has been writing. Does that mean prevention of murder isn't relevant? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
AeLiSTaS3
|
  |
| Joined: 02 Jan 2010 |
| Total Posts: 4918 |
|
| |
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 02:20 PM |
| Reason plz, not everything is relevant nor is everything irrelevant. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 02:22 PM |
I guess I worded that wrong.
But 200 years ago carry fire-arms around could be the difference between life and death. There was not a centralized justice system or enforcers. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Ryplayer
|
  |
| Joined: 06 Jul 2007 |
| Total Posts: 6484 |
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 02:22 PM |
I do agree that limiting gun sales will not solve the gun problem, but it will certainly control it to an extent - it's way too easy to obtain a gun in the USA. The gun laws are out of control.
The second amendment was written during a period where America's existence was threatened. The current gun laws have no place in a civilized and modern society. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 03:54 PM |
If you think something written 200 years ago is relevant to todays society then you need a reality check.
____
Much in the same way that we should disregard Newton's laws of motion.
Gotcha. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Boeing717
|
  |
 |
| Joined: 08 Jun 2008 |
| Total Posts: 70007 |
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 03:56 PM |
pizza
technically we safely can relativity replaced them |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
0Z0NE
|
  |
| Joined: 25 May 2010 |
| Total Posts: 7951 |
|
| |
|
pepper0
|
  |
| Joined: 01 Sep 2007 |
| Total Posts: 12032 |
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 04:04 PM |
@sasuke
the fact that it was written 200 years ago has no base or relevance.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 04:14 PM |
"And guns shouldn't be allowed in places where they are prohibited."
Are you implying that just anyone can prohibit guns? What if a firing range prohibited guns? Anyone who has the power to prohibit them has the power to allow them, and I say that not allowing them (including places like school) is against the second amendment. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Twigs180
|
  |
| Joined: 10 Mar 2008 |
| Total Posts: 18664 |
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 04:26 PM |
Tell me why the theatre shooting happened at a gun free zone?
Also, tell me, do you support prohibition?
Or the auto industry? You don't need a car that goes 200 miles per hour. Cars kill far more people than guns. I could go on and on on why the auto industry is a good metaphor for the firearm industry.
And lastly, the point of the 2nd Amendment actually was written with the concept that civilians can have the same level of weapons as the government. It was written to protect the 1st Amendment. Want to know what was the high powered weapons of their day in the 1790s? Rifled muskets. Those were killing machines, specifically designated for civilian use. Rifled muskets would later go on to win the Napoleonic Wars. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
jbg23
|
  |
| Joined: 21 Feb 2011 |
| Total Posts: 2163 |
|
|
| 31 Jul 2012 04:30 PM |
boeing
that relativity stuff is too newfangled
for srs |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|