Be sure to vote, I am curious where most atheists stand on this issue.
Tags:
Permalink Reply by Unseen on February 2, 2012 at 10:03pm I always wonder about people who feel they need a gun to protect life and limb, in case of a home invasion, for example. If that is the real reason they need a gun, do they also have a home defibrillator? I ask because someone having a heart attack in the home is a far more likely event than a home invasion.
Permalink Reply by Gabeline Stavis on February 10, 2012 at 8:47am
Permalink Reply by Unseen on February 10, 2012 at 9:21am Why do you assume a defribrillator would only be useful based on your own health? You might have a guest or visitor who has a heart attack. One has a first aid kit primarily for oneself, I suppose, but also to handle any situations that happen in or near the home whether or not they benefit just oneself.
Permalink Reply by Gabeline Stavis on February 10, 2012 at 3:30pm
Permalink Reply by Unseen on April 30, 2013 at 9:21am Oh, are home invasions fairly common now where you live. Tell me where that is so I can avoid living there.
Permalink Reply by Tom Sarbeck on April 27, 2013 at 4:32am Matt, no one tells the difference at a gun shop between a law-abiding citizen and a criminal.
You tell the difference when a criminal breaks into or otherwise gains entry to your home.
Permalink Reply by Ed on February 2, 2012 at 8:56pm Sophie,
If you came from a gun ownership family then you can ignore my plea for you to receive some sound firearms training with your weapon(s) of choice.
Permalink Reply by Steve on February 2, 2012 at 10:49am I think it was really meant to easily equip a militia army. Back then it was usual to have a small standing army and then quickly increase it with conscription. Anything else was too expensive for most countries. Having people armed meant that there were already trained in shooting and that they owned some of their own equipment. At that time, the best weapon was also a rifled musket. Not automatic rifles.
Having some restrictions on guns isn't a bad thing. That doesn't mean banning them outright or making them to hard to get. There is a healthy middle ground somewhere
Permalink Reply by Jack Matthews on February 2, 2012 at 1:05pm In the context of time which that amendment was written, I think it safe to say that all persons had a right to own a firearm. For me the question has always been, at what point the government should restrain ownership of certain types of weapons. For example, should an individual be allowed to own a fully automatic weapon, or what caliber of weapon, etc.
Permalink Reply by Ed on February 2, 2012 at 9:03pm For example, should an individual be allowed to own a fully automatic weapon, or what caliber of weapon, etc.
To me it is irrelevant if your law-abiding. A semi-automatic firearm in the hands of a competent knowledgeable gun owner can make it perform "automatic."
Permalink Reply by sway austin on February 2, 2012 at 4:00pm Guns are great and I think anyone (sans convicted felons/etc) should have the right to own one if they wish. Everyone should have the right to defend themselves...911 isn't always an option.
I don't own a gun, but like the idea of purchasing one at some point.
Started by Adam in Small Talk. Last reply by Rocky john 51 seconds ago. 37 Replies 0 Likes
Posted by Nelson on May 19, 2013 at 12:00am 0 Comments 2 Likes
Check out our new mobile/tablet version of Think Atheist! www.ThinkAtheist.com/m
© 2013 Created by Morgan Matthew.
