Should Gun Ownership Be A Global Right?

Discussion in 'General Global Topics' started by Annie, Mar 20, 2006.

  1. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    I think there is something to this. My view of the 2nd amendment, it keeps the government aware that they shouldn't take us less than seriously, when aroused:

    http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/glenn_reynolds/2006/03/a_new_international_human_righ.html


     
  2. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540
    It ought to be. Arm the world and Islamic terrorists might find themselves being shot at in the middle of their suicide bombings.
     
  3. Just a guy
    Offline

    Just a guy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2006
    Messages:
    191
    Thanks Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +5
    The solution to future genocide is to promote the American right to carry fire arms to a human right? And nations with gun control laws would then be violating human rights? And being such an evil nation... they will be placed on the axis of terrorists and subject to immidiate liberation (Which would be easy, since they haven't armed all their citizens to their teeth).
    :clap1: Great idea.
    Something is wrong with you.

    So you actually spend your hard earned money to buy guns, - in case of your own government get the idea to genocide you?!?

    And suddenly suicide bombers will have the legal - human - right to be carrying guns instead? Brilliant! They don't need to kill themselves anymore!

    You don't think this kind of legislation should be something every country might decide for it self?
     
  4. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540
    It's not the suicide bombers who need guns. It's the innocents they attempt to kill who need guns, who are currently banned from having guns.
     
  5. Just a guy
    Offline

    Just a guy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2006
    Messages:
    191
    Thanks Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +5
    I know what you meant... but of all examples you could come up with! :)
    Look: Suicide bombers run in to heavily armed military positions without the fear of their guns!
    If you had suggested that suicide bombing would render death penalty it would have been fun too. So that they would think twice before doing their deed...
     
  6. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    No dear, but it's not nice of you to say such a thing.
    No, I've already stated such.
    :laugh: Yeah, they can't carry guns, so they carry bombs? They are law abiding, other than the bombs. :wtf:
     
  7. Nuc
    Offline

    Nuc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    2,377
    Thanks Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Ratings:
    +141
    Seems like gun ownership is universal in parts of Africa, and look what a cheeful place that is!
     
  8. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540
    Actually, I think gun ownership is one-sided in the places you're thinking of.
     
  9. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540
    OK, maybe that was a bad example. But the principle still holds. Guns allow the law-abiding to protect themselves from the criminal.
     
  10. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    Suicide bombers do not generally attack heavily-armed positions. Note, I said "generally." That would be to preclude one instance being given as evidence that they do.

    When they even attack the military, it is usually vehicle convoys (lightly armed) and or roadblocks/checkpoints; which, are also lightly armed.

    Attacking people that are trained to and will fight back is not conducive to their goal -- to terrorize the populace. In short, they murder defenseless noncombatants.
     

Share This Page