Gun control: genuinely needed or another form of government control over citizens?

Actually, I think rather than the government controling the people, the people are to control the government. That is what is wrong with this country today, the people have lost the vision of our founding fathers, and seem to think that we need the government to rule and control us. This is mainly because the governmental leaders over the years have little by litle taken away our liberties, and made the masses believe that it is for their own good. Until, George W. Bush got into office and now he has made the Constitution and Bill of Right almost null and void.





I can not believe the brain washed answers on this page. By all rights we should be entitled to possess any weapon the government can. The whole reason for the right to keep and bear arms was so the citizens could protect themselves from the government, in the case that the government over stepped its power and a revolution was called for. They had just fought a revolution against the ruling powers, and declared their independence. They knew the threat of government growing to large and over-powering.





I think we would be better off if everyone owned at least one firearm. As has been said, criminals will get one if they are permitted to by law or not. They might think twice about breaking into somebody's place though if everybody was armed. I also think gun saftey and how to handle (and shoot) a firearm should be taught to childerned starting in grade school. I started shooting when I was 4 or 5.





And to answer the reason why one person may choose to have several firearms, hunting. For instance you might use a .22 for hunting rabbit or squarel, but you would not use it for hunting deer and the likes. And a shotgun would most likely be best for bird hunting, maybe a 12 gauge. Get the picture?Gun control: genuinely needed or another form of government control over citizens?
Genuinely needed, yes there is an amendment to the right to have guns. However, the founding fathers did not know about mental illness or children getting a hold of a handgun and shooting themselves or their friends. Gun control would protect children (safety locks on guns) and make sure those mental ill did not hurt themselves or others.Gun control: genuinely needed or another form of government control over citizens?
Gun control..why now ?.Its our civil right to protect our selves ...what would you do,if someone break into your home...?
Genuinely needed. I can respect a person's desire to have a firearm for safety purposes. Criminals will continue to get them, so it is understandable that average citizens would choose to have one for personal/home security.





However, I don't see any reason why one person should be allowed to have 5 or 10 firearms. What for? Certainly not for home protection/safety - who needs 5 guns at one time? And I think assault weapons should be banned for anyone not in the military or police force.





Finally, background checks need to be more in depth and more certain. Obviously there is no 100% perfect system, but it needs to be a little more secure so that we know mental health patients aren't buying firearms.
gun control should be defined as being able to hit the target you are shooting at the government should not be able to tell my what kind or how many guns i can own and what's the difference between an assault rifle and pistol besides having to reload more both are semi auto and some pistols have just as much power and if you have a child in the house and your guns aren't in a safe or locked up you should not be allowed to have either
Depends how paranoid you are about government intentions against you.





I live in the largely disarmed UK and am glad we do not suffer many shooting deaths and that ownership of a working weapon is almost a certain indication of criminal intent (pretty much unless you're a farmer, groundskeeper or other professional outdoorsman). Nonetheless I own two smoothbore shotguns to help me with my work and there is nothing to stop anyone fulfilling necessary criteria as I have.





I can appreciate the standing of gun culture in the US but fall back on the consitution here (big fan of that), it says you're allowed 'arms', so you have them. Although of course it is the state's (ie, national government's) right to decide what that entails and this will always be true - in the same manner governments are allowed to do virtually anything if it satisfies the constitutional arrangement of their state (if there is one!).





I do think the arguement about 'balance of power' is rather bogus, the ability of even the most well-armed US hunter to face off against your state's military (Apaches, Abrams %26amp; up) is miniscule; although they'd have a lot of fun going all Red Dawn in the event of an actual oppressive US government ever appearing.





Governments always control their people in some ways, that is their role, we shouldn't have to fear it if we are true participants in it and ensure it is working correctly.
Hmmm...





Well, last time I checked the second amendment guaranteed our right to bear arms. It did not guarantee our right to do drive bys, random acts of theft, or general acts of aggravated anything. And the funny part? The vast majority of people who commit those crimes can't legally carry (or even own) a firearm.





So, in my crazy mind, gun control screws the good people over. Anyone who can qualify to carry a firearm are not always allowed to because it's concealed, or because it's a full auto, or because it's purple, or made of paper, or whatever. The vast majority of the people who choose to and can legally buy a weapon are doing so to protect them self, their family, and their well being, as the second amendment intended. Maybe criminals would think twice about petty theft, B%26amp;E, or assault knowing their potential victim is armed. And if they didn't think twice...Do we really need those people on the streets?





Last time I checked the Constitution was the ultimate law of the land, and that includes all amendments. I don't see it as a means for government control, for the most part it's been a big tantrum raised by seven or eight people (figuratively) who believe guns are inherently wrong and have too much time and money to fight with the government. Never underestimate the power of stupid people in numbers, especially combined with the media and CASH.





Btw...anyone who is responsible enough to own a weapon knows the importance of trigger locks for children. Maybe people should stop letting their kids play Halo before they wonder why their kids would have no concept of what ';shooting'; someone can do?
Yes, it's another form of government control. Hitler supported gun control, Gandhi did not. Personally, I think in today's world you have to find a common ground --- if you've had a criminal background or you aren't an adult, no guns for you.
Americans live in fear, and feel they need a gun to survive through the dark nights.


Less guns less killings


Guns kill people, rarely people!
The right of civilian ownership of firearms is one of the main rights that distinguishes the free from the slaves.





Without this balance of power; your rights are merely privileges that the powerful dispense like mothers dispense candy to good little children.
It would be feasible for 500,000-1,000,000 active troops to impose martial law for a BAD reason over a populace that had no guns.





As things are now...if they want to impose martial law, they will have to ask our permission first.