[Halofan48]

Finally, finished reading this thread. Well, back to the main topic. I personally believe guns should be banned. This would prevent many crimes from occurring. Some are very difficult to perform without firearms. Like, a man comes home to find his wife sleeping with another man, and in a moment of blind rage picks up a gun and kills them both, later realizing what he had done. Doing that with a knife or hatchet would be a lot more difficult and he'd probably calm down before he succeeded. Plus, the second amendment was made in a time when people had to worry about attacks from Britain and other powers that had colonies in the Americas along with bands of Native Americans attacking towns and people for taking their land and the weapons they could own were usually one shot fire arms, unlike the semi-automatic weapons of today. Since we no longer really have to worry about attacks from Native Americans, and the threat from Europe is minimal at the moment, the second amendment has no real use anymore. Also, those statistics showing a lower crime rate with gun concealment laws probably do not take into account other laws about law enforcement or the like also passed by the state. Unfortunately, a ban on guns is unlikely to occur. One thing that MUST be done is to check the mental and criminal history of a person when they try to purchase a gun. The simple fact of the matter is many of the crimes committed by gun men are committed using legally purchased fire arms. One thing I don't agree with is Osborn's earlier comment to have an elective in High School training teenagers how to use fire arms. That will lead to more school shootings with higher death tolls because those kids who are violent or outcasts will take this elective then use what they've learned to hurt those that have hurt them. The elective would basically cause more harm then good. Also, with higher amounts of guns, people who shouldn't be able to use a gun will be able to find one more easily. You say that criminals would be deterred by more citizens trained and equipped with fire arms. This is debatable. Criminals are often unintelligent and desperate, so I doubt the guy with no money in a desperate situation is going to take the time to observe people, find out who has a gun, so they know who not to rob. They'll just rob the first person they want. Also, don't say that the incident with the of the kid getting shot because he walked on the mans lawn isn't adequate proof when when your also using one incident of a citizen shooting an armed criminal as proof for your point unless your willing to say that your proof is also inadequate or that their proof is adequate. Your choice. Also, if the government is doing all these things against the people, what do you suggest we do about it?