Americans, why do you own a gun?
 

I don't want to start a controversy or start some shit but as a Canadian I wasn't raised with the idea of having a gun in the house or even wanting to shoot a gun.

I did go to the shooting range last year with my brother in law who is a border patrol officer and didn't like having so much power in my hands and knowing how it can be used it didn't attract me but I know many of you have guns and I wonder why do you?

I don't want a partisan answer as to why you should have one or not just you personally, I want to understand and just dont.

Can someone explain this to me logically so I can stop wondering where this need comes from?

Thanks , and don't hate :)

land of the free

I guess I should have said ... "in more than four words" but thanks for clearing that up for me :thumbsup

canadian eh? i dont need a reason. why do you have round bacon muther fucker? :321GFY j/k :1orglaugh but why?

The 2nd Amendment is designed to give the people of a free country a last resort fighting chance against tyranny, should it ever overcome the republic.

2nd Amendment:

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

It's not about hunting or sport, it's about preserving freedom. This is why American's guns should be sitting idle until the time comes. There is no reason for Americans to use guns at this point in time because we are not facing direct tyranny.

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. ... God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion; what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms." -- Thomas Jefferson

See your question is asked as if I made round bacon. I don't agree with round bacon and think it tastes like shit and eat regular bacon just like you. But my question is directed at a decision that each of you with guns has made. That is what I want to understand.

So far I see you come from the land of the free and bacon... I'm no closer to understanding.

Ok finally I feel like we're getting somewhere, but do you feel threatened in your everyday life that warrants you spending hundreds of dollars to own a gun just in case?

Not everyone has to spend money on guns, they have been in families for generations and are handed down for free.

It is illegal for me to posses a firearm but if I could it would be to protect myself or my home.

Two answers

1) Personal protection in my home

2) I enjoy going to the gun range and shooting responsibly

Fucking scary bacon!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v5...consarnie1.jpg

English Bacon! Best of both :winkwink:

In this context I would back any American on the 2nd ammendment. When it comes to being allowed to carry a handgun with you 24/7 or being allowed to kill someone who is a bit angry with you I totally disagree.

Also, if it is to defend against tyranny, we need nukes, choppers, bombs, Planes to compete with a real army these days.

Your handguns are not going to protect much lieberty to be brutally honest.

Being allowed to kill someone who is a bit angry with you? Where do you get that from? That is called murder and it's illegal in the U.S., there are consequences for that.

And your defeatist argument is so played out.

Nukes? Choppers? Bombs? How is it exactly that certain Middle Eastern gangs are still running rampant when all they really have is guns? According to you they should have been wiped out almost instantly with zero chance of resistance.

this is not the reason. this just means you can have guns. other countries allow people to have guns too (although not so easily) and they still dont own them..

also believe it or not but most of other civilized countries have freedoms too,sometimes even more than us of a :winkwink:

those who say constitution is sacred...like someone said elsewhere - at the time of the conception the worst weapon was what,a muskete? You cant compare that time with modern civilizations and stuff you can buy now.. also doesn't constitution indirectly talk about slaves? things can change as the world changes...

that said I dont think banning guns would solve everything but limiting it to some handguns or maybe harder background checks or something might help a little..but until the mentality "we love guns & guns solve problems" changes no ban can help..

I have a pistol for two basic reasons.

1. I like to go camping and I take it with me. You never know what you might run into out there, could be some kind of angry animal or some meth head or something.

2. I have it for home defense. I realize that in many cases it would be useless, but if someone is trying to smash my door down and attack me for some reason I have it to encourage them to not do that.

I'm curious why you think in many cases it would be useless?

the 2nd amendment is always the first argument that people use. but i don't think they realize, the reason this was even written was because the american revolution was going on, it was language applied to the current scenario. back then, there was a threat of the british invading your town or home at any time.

since it is in the constitution, it hasn't ever been taken out(i don't know if they can?). and as time went on, as technology improved, it all kind of was considered encompassing. assault rifles didn't exist, or i doubt they would've written that to be honest or been more specific

by the way i do own a gun in my home, for personal protection and i do enjoy going to the range as a stress relief, somewhat of a hobby. the more you immerse yourself with them, i feel the more comfortable you are with them:2 cents:

The "times have changed" argument doesn't work... you just think "times have changed."

History repeats itself, and there will always be people trying to destroy a free democracy. A well-armed public will at least have some sort of chance at defending their freedom.

actually, times have changed. there was no organized army at the time, so the people were the army. the words have now been twisted, and usually people say they need them to protect against our own government, which i think is retarded.

if history does repeat itself, i would much rather rely on the army, marines, navy, etc to protect me than some nut job with 4 assault rifles that wears a tin foil hat

I bet Jews in Nazi Germany thought "times changed" also.

I can hear them now...

"C'mon man, there's no reason for you to own a gun! It's not like anyone will ever come and take you from your home to a concentration camp, that's ridiculous! Those types of things don't happen!"

"Yea, you're probably right, let's just be completely defenseless and hope for the best."

I don't shoot anymore. But number 2 was really big for me. Handgun shooting was always difficult and frustrating for me. But it felt really good when I had a group going.

Because I can.

yeah you're right. americans having full access to a full arsenal of weapons has prevented us from having hitler. that is the secret to it all

It isn't far off that, pulling guns out on people all the time seems common place.

And yeah, they're doing great aren't they? The guys without planes, Bombs, Choppers or any real threat or technology behind them, Really changing the world!

Be honest with yourself, why is anyone dying from violence anywhere? It is all stupid!

The 2nd Amendment does not say "The right to form militias due to an absence of a federal army." lol

The right to form a militia is there because the militias would fight against the state military, should it be taken over in tyranny, they are not one in the same.

You can't rely on the army, marines, navy, etc if they are the ones oppressing you. Think. This is why you have the right to form militias in case this ever happens.

Seems like a lot of you need to study history more to understand how tyranny unfolds.

No, it hasn't prevented us from "having hitler," but if a "hitler" did come into power the American public would be much more prepared to deal with it and defend their freedoms than people in the past who were disarmed.

I bought my first handgun because I was involved in the legal field and some of our clients were not trustworthy, so my boss wanted me armed.

I bought my second handgun because my son needed the money.

are you retarded? of course it doesn't say that. use some logic. why was this written? because at the time, there was no organized federal government for protection, because it has just been formed at the time with this document. the colonies were organizing themselves as one.

i think using hitler as an example for why a country should have guns is moronic. if you have a guy with hitler's agenda coming to power, i think you have bigger problems than guns

I never said they were changing the world, not sure where you got that from, all I'm saying is all they have is guns, yet they are putting up a pretty good fight over the years against all the advanced "choppers, nukes, bombs, etc" that you're talking about.

Fact is the only reason Americans need guns is to protect them from other Americans with guns. They cry all day long how safe they are and how much freedom they have but in the meantime they live in the most dangerous shithole in the western world with the most crime because of all these guns. And they think they can solve this by adding more guns in society.

And that is the reason why the rest of the world just laughs at them, shake their head in disbelief and think what a goddamn backwards imbeciles.

First arguement: History repeats itself. seems to be the arguement against what some other people believe, and that is: Second arguement: Unless you learn from history you are doomed to repeat it.

2 quite different phrases that a lot of English speakers seem divided on.

As far as I'm concerned, Dunblane, and all the other mass shootings wherever, are more related to second arguement, the first arguement is what happens when nothing is done.

The founders were brilliant men, they had foresight and understood that history always repeats itself, whether it's the year 1800 or 2100, the threat of tyranny taking away our freedom will always exist... that's why it's so great that our country has a constitution protecting our rights...

We just happen to be a long way past obtaining our liberty that most of us have become complacent and apathetic, thinking everything is just fine and that nothing bad could ever possibly happen in the future.

I have a small number of handguns and assault rifles. They are "secure", meaning I would be unable to defend myself in required to do so in my home. I have a kid, and I'm just not taking any chances are - The chances of someone getting shot by our own firearm is much greater than a home invasion. I also have a dog and a home alarm system.

I have firearms in the event "society breaks down and I need to defend myself". I am not a doomsday / end of the world type of person, but I always like to be prepared - for anything. I've been through an earthquake (and no power for days) and also the more recent propane train fire where most of my town was evacuated, and that's when the idiots and criminals come out - when law enforcement is over taxed and scarce. With the way the economy was going for a while, I was worried.

A lot of people think I am "anti gun". Obviously, I am not. I just believe we need tighter control on firearms. A simple background check is not enough. Someone should be speaking to neighbors, employers, spouses, doctors, looking for anger issues or mental problems. If someone in the household has mental issues - that's a no go.

In this case, the son had some mental issues - autism and some kind of multiple personality issue - yet no one said "You have a son with mental issues who has access to firearms". This would have been prevented with stricter law.

Originally the Second Amendment was included for "suppressing insurrection" - Meaning, the US Government expected the citizens to protect the the government in the even someone attacked. However, "insurrection" usually means "a violent uprising against an authority or government"... Which sort of means the US Government expected it's citizens to protect itself from an armed uprising of it's own citizens?

they were brilliant men, but to say we're complacent? come on, you're not going to wake up one day to some rebel tyranny group breaking down your door

i agree 100% with this statement

If someone breaks into my house while I am not home and I come home and catch them in the act, odds are they will either have the gun already or be all over me before I could get to it.

If I am asleep and someone breaks in there is a decent chance I won't be able to get to it in time for it to be useful. I sleep pretty damn heavy so by the time I wake up, realize what is happening and get the gun the person (if they wanted to do me harm) would be all over me.

It is in my closet in an easy to get to spot, but still being able to get to the gun and use it in a situation where I am in immediate danger may not be as easy as a lot of people think.

Still, there are plenty of situations where it could be useful. As I sit and type this I am in the bedroom I use as an office. If someone tried to smash my door in, I'm pretty sure I could get to it before they got through the door and onto me.

Obviously it's not going to happen overnight, but once they come for the guns it will be a sign that we're getting closer. They already took away your right to privacy (Patriot Act and similar acts) and your right to a trial (NDAA).

Sounds like you should get a dog. Mine barks at even the slightest sense of an intruder...

True, you're right. But it is the same kind of playing field any rebels in any country would find themselves in these days. Back when all we had were swords, things were perhaps different. People adapt obviously, look at the history of Ninja and Samurai.

It just doesn't seem logical to me is all I'm saying.

If I wanted to protect myself from tyranny, I would need a level playing field minimum.

I think you're probably out of touch if you don't think the average American is complacent and apathetic. It's a cycle and it never seems to change...

http://gardinersright.files.wordpres.../02/tytler.jpg

you may be of sound mind, but as it's already been proving several times just in the last 6 months, there are plenty of people that aren't. i'd rather put up with more scrutiny to have weapons, knowing that i'll pass their tests and help keep them out of nutjob's hands

So you would rather be completely unarmed rather than armed? That is such a strange defeatist attitude to me...

and the biggest teeth

http://www.sportsrubbish.com/wp-cont...ish-smiles.jpg

So far the answer that comes most is "to protect my home" so I have to ask this question then:

If you knew 100% for certain that the person breaking in doesn't have a gun and has never even used one or even held one... would you still want to own one to protect your home?

I'm not arguing against more scrutiny when it comes to purchasing weapons, although we do have background checks and other things already...

I've seen ideas mentioned like "ask questions" and "talk to neighbors," but these ideas don't seem practical to me.

What difference does it make if the person breaking in has a gun or not?

I think even idiotic criminals understand that there is a risk of being shot if you break into someone's house.

background check is totally basic, and getting a concealed permit is even a bigger joke. main question in all of it is have you been guilty of a felony and do you have mental problems. thats it.

Biggest lips:

http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures...mith-41044.jpg

I'm armed. Just with different weapons. Let's face it, there is a reason the US tried Napalm, and why bombs and nukes exist.

If people truly cared about the mental health of our future generations then they would do things like boycott Hollywood and violent video games and any other place that children are learning about these immoral behaviors.

No one seems to want to explore the topic of psychology and pharmaceuticals and why young people are acting out in violence, they'd rather focus their energy on the guns which are simply inanimate objects used as tools by people with mental problems that started somewhere outside of the realm of "guns" to begin with.