A Discussion About Guns
I want to have a Discussion about gun violence
Any thoughtful ideas and commments will be paid in SBD
In light of the recent mass shooting in Las Vegas, USA, I wanted to have an open discussion about gun violence in America. After tragic events where many lose their life due to an armed person wanting to inflict harm, social media blows up with Left s Right rhetoric, where the gun debate turns into hostility and nothing is accomplished. In this post I want to start a discussion about whether or not citizens should own firearms, how many, what type, etc and whether there is a solution that we can agree upon for stopping these acts of terror that have seemingly become omnipresent.
Rules - A discussion and debate not an argument - (Thoughtful insight will be paid in SBD)
If you are going to participate in this discussion there are a few rules you must adhere to:
- Constructive ideas
- No name calling of any sort.
- Trying to stick to facts rather than opinions
- Understanding that there is no easy solution.
Some Facts - For
As the second amendment in the United States Constitution reads, Individuals have the right to bear arms for the main purpose of self-defense, oppression and defense of the state. This was originally adopted in 1791 and is one of the fundamental arguing points for pro-gun activists. You can read more on the second amendment here.
There is no question that guns are a big deterrent to would be criminals. Self defense is still the largest part of gun usage in America. If regular citizens are allowed to carry guns they can stop would be attackers before damage is done. An interesting post regarding the public being allowed to carry concealed weapons;
An analysis of the FBI crime statistics found that states that adopted concealed carry laws REDUCED crime
Read more of that article here
The case can be made that we are safer when everyone has access to guns, with thorough background checks, licensing and training. Have a look at American Gun Facts. I have fact checked a few (not all) of these claims and cross referenced their citations. Some are from valid sources while others click to dead links. Either way, before you take my word for it, it's always good to cross reference.
Against
So we have briefly looked at the case FOR guns, now lets do the same AGAINST
America by far and away has the largest number of mass shootings in the world. America also has a very large population, so when adjusting per 100,000 people we still see that America leads the way. America also has by far and away the largest military in the world, perhaps there is a correlation there, but you be the judge. The US also has the highest suicide rate of the top 10 most developed nations and a large majority of these suicides are by gun. Here is the Wikipedia Page, it gives a in depth breakdown of gun violence in America. If you prefer more of a visual, I have linked a video which gives a breakdown of gun violence in the US, I highly recommend watching it. Always remember there are many many statistics that people will throw out and use to argue for and against guns, remember we should always be critical and cross reference everything.
Here we have a simple meme that talks about what happened in Australia after there was a mass shooting years back. It is difficult to compare Australia to the United Sates, just like it is difficult to compare any two nations, but the facts don't lie. Since Australia's action on guns, there hasn't bee a mass shooting since.
Lastly, I have shared a clip from a recent Jimmy Kimmel monologue where he takes about what happened in Las Vegas and the death of many innocent civilians. To quote from his piece:
After reading a lot of the online discussion in the aftermath, many people say this is terrible, but there is nothing we can do about it, but I disagree with that intensely. Of course there is something we can do about it.
Give the video a watch and just listen to his thoughts. Whether you agree with his comedy, his personality or his show is not important here.
So to finish off, no matter which side you support, whether you're black, brown or white, we must come tot the table and discuss the issue at hand and come up with solutions, because one thing I think we can all agree about is that the current situation is not working. I look forward to hearing your thoughts and opinions. Remember, thoughtful comments will earn you SBD
I'm not sure whether taking guns away or not will ever help out saving lives. I don't know if we even take away all the guns if it would even stopped any of the senseless killing of human lives. The day that the calamine shootings took place here in the United States another senseless killing took place over in China a school was also attacked but with a man used a machete. In New York a bomb. It just goea on and on. I think its a humanity thing Iwish people would just love one another and there would be no one or group hurting each other.
I do not have the answer but my thoughts and prays our with you all.
Yeah there is violence everywhere in the world, but in the more developed western countries, the US leads the way, and it looks to only be getting worse. For the good oh humanity we really need to think of solutions to this problem
My son found a quote that's been circulating: Blaming guns on violence is like blaming spoons on obesity.
Taking away firearms will not stop a criminal from acquiring them, They don't follow the law. A mentally ill person also- just because there is a law on the books will not stop a sick person or a criminal from doing what they want.
Also, think about it- we only hear about the bad. That is how the MSM is set up. We do not hear about the hundreds of lives a day that are saved because of firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens. We do not hear about the toddlers who still have a mom because she carried a pistol legally and defended herself against an attacker. We don't hear about these things.
We only hear of the negatives.
With that being said, I personally do not see why automatic and semi's are needed for "home and personal defense," however in a supposed free country, once the citizens begin allowing the PTB to take "rights" away, it begins a domino effect and pretty soon there are no rights left and really stupid and disgusting things start happening. Look at homeland security.
Someone who is driven to do such horrendous acts will do them no matter what. Cooking meth is illegal but there are recipes and detailed instructions all over the regular, public internet. Just a quick Google search away. And just because the recipes to cook the drug are there for the public to easily access, and the ingredients are made from common household items you can purchase anywhere, does not mean everyone uses them to bake a crack cake. You only hear about the few bad who do, not the millions who don't.
You make some good points.
With regards to the spoon analogy, a spoon is something to help you eat that is what is was designed to do. A gun was designed to shoot/destroy/kill things. That’s it’s purpose. Maybe because guns have become so ubiquitous in American culture, people feel the need to have them for “protection”.
You’re right about the stories we don’t hear though, obviously the media will not report on that, and yes law abidingcitizen with carry and conceal firearms can definitely help out in a dire situation. Personally, I don’t see the need to go to Walmart to buy some things and bring a gun with me, that thought has never even crossed my mind.
There will always be criminals breaking the laws and it’s no different with obtaining guns, but what if the government were to buy back guns and amunitions and have them destroyed? With less and less out there on the market would how would you feel?
Regarding the spoon analogy: sure, spoons were made for eating. But they're also handy tools for the act of shooting drugs ;) Humans, as well as many creatures, devise ways to use things not as they were intended all the time.
The government would have to cause an economic crisis to justify a gun buy back at this point. But things would be so shaky I don't think it would work. If things got that bad even people who are against guns would be clamoring on the black market. In a case such as that, crime will rise dramatically, and people will need to defend themselves as even now there's nowhere near enough law enforcement officials to make a difference in the event of something big.
My thinking behind that?
Why was the food stamp program developed? The ptb realized a hungry man is a desperate man. Who will do anything... In cases of economic crisis, or just uncertain times in general, people have less faith in their government.
If that were the case with less and less on the legal market, there would be more and more on the black market. And I would feel fear. And I do not feel fear now. And I say this as a mom who's son- also on Steemit :)- was in a school shooting a couple years ago..
Yes people can take any good invention and make it into something destructive, we have seen this throughout history, but a guns sole purpose is destruction. When guns are so easily accessible what is to stop someone who feels bullied, depressed, angry at their spouse, pissed off at the driver in front of them or any other number of reasons from committing a heinous act with a gun?
Who do you need protection from? Aren't the police supposed to do that, or is there absolutely no faith left in the system/government? I have traveled to numerous countries where firearms are both legal and illegal, but only in America have I seen people so proud to be a gun owner. Maybe it has just be ingrained in the media and education system.
There was a crazed man living on my property that I live on with my kids. Just three weekends ago the police told me there's nothing they can do but ticket him.. Three police men. The man had been living on my property. He started a fire in me and my neighbor's property three weekends ago.
The officers told me I can use a gun in this situation, because there's nothing they can do.
I don't understand exactly how the laws work everywhere, but trespassing is a criminal offence where I am from. I don't understand how there is nothing the police can do.
Hi! Perspective from an Aussie who does not own a gun....To see people die at the hands of maniacs with guns is truly horrifying and I am in no way trying to downplay the gravity of recent events, however... I think an important point that needs to be addressed, yet seems to consistently being overlooked is the fact that the recent events in Vegas were carried out using guns with ILLEGAL modifications, so technically his guns weren't legal anyway. Does anybody actually think he gave two shits about that? So had guns been illegal altogether would it have really made a difference?
The other point, and I believe this is by far the more important of the two is protection against oppressive regimes. Now this might stir people up a little but I venture to say that the more than 100 million people that were murdered in the last century under marxist dictators internationally far outweighs the number of deaths by insane, lone gunmen...That's not even to mention any other forms of oppressive government (that's JUST Marxism).
I understand these are heavy discussions that do need to be had, but if I were in the US, I would be far more concerned about the dangerous people who want to take your guns than the chance you might get shot by a crazy person and to be REALLY real, from an international perspective I believe that the power that (those who want to take the guns) would gain from that would also have severe implications on a global scale. Perhaps that is a slightly selfish perspective but to a degree I almost feel like the US citizens are a sort of "last line defence" against a truly oppressive globalist movement that is just waiting in the wing for it's chance to strike...
My 2c.
I'm a legal citizen of the US with dual citizenship with Italia. I lost nothing if the US removed firearms.
But any government who wishes to remove something which a countryman has is scary indeed.
What other rights will tptb be terminating?
Yeah there is no easy answer and you’re right about oppressive regimes, whether it’s the current North Korea dilemma to stalin’s Russia or Ceausescu in Romania, when the state has too much power, the people are in trouble. And with the amount of guns/tanks/drones/weapons the American government has, it can be very difficult to convince any citizen to give up his arms. But this is at least a discussion that needs to be had
It certainly doesn't need to be had:
This discussion is prompted by the Acts of a Deranged man who sought to commit a massacre.
We are discussing Guns in the context of "Should they be allowed?" ONLY because that happened. It's a pseudo discussion at that because everyone understand that nobody can and should bear a consequences of the acts of this mad man, and those that are victims to his act need to blame the problematic "Gun Free" zone that creates such a tantalizing target for these mad men and the lack of protection in these vulnerable places.
If he did it with a bomb this conversation wouldn't happen, regardless of gun free zones or not as nobody can protect against such a suicidal mad man, and if he did it with a bulldozer, equally this would not be a discussion we would be having as would be the case for anything other than a Legal (not lawful) firearm.
The American Government is not a Democracy, here the 51% DON'T vote to eat the other 49% for dinner, and the majority has made it's voice heard on matters of "Mob Rules/Democracy" which are interchangeable terms because Democracy is only the appearance of Legitimate, but it could never amount to actual Lawful Governance which relies all on the Consent of the people, who clearly Do Not Consent by the fact that 2/3 aren't even registered to vote! What you call American Government should never be called so as it's fundamentally not what the American Government guaranteed to Americans is or has ever been.
In light of that, North Korea is more Lawful than what you purport as American Government and there is a reason this Unlawful Corporation is going after North Korea after gifting them the only type of Nuclear Reactor that could be used to produce weapons grade plutonium, and it's akin to the snobby rich kid PLANTing his stuff in the poor kids hands and then crying "thief", unfortunately the world is waking up, and this causes the rich kid to profess even more loudly "THIEF", but all the world hears is a snobby rich kid making dubious allegations which doesn't bode well with the little runt.
No pressure or anything guys haha..
I wish I would see more people voicing this. I think a lot of people feel this way, but either can't or for whatever reason don' voice these opinions. I'm hoping to get an article out on this later today if you'd like to check it out.
Will do man! Let me know when you post it and I'll come have a look, I'm following you now but my feed tends to get so full of crap that I just head straight to the "political" feed now anyways :)
https://steemit.com/guns/@mattclarke/this-is-what-you-sound-like
I agree with much of what you said, however, I do have to mention a few things. 1 the "bump stocks" are a 100% legal modification. 2 they, along with the 100 round surefire magazines mitigated the carnage. both are gimmicks, useful only for seoerating the gullible from their money. both features increase the frequency of jams, which the shooter compensated for by having more rifles available. on the subject of oppressive regimes, in ...I believe it was 1938, Adolph Hitler prohibited Jews from owning firearms. much easier to load people in boxcars when they arent armed
love this @jasonshick thanks for inducing the conversation. I think my biggest desire before getting into gun violence is just the desire to not harden my heart toward anyone dying regardless of the size. All of these deaths are people with families and friends that have to deal with the repercussions.
In regards to solutions - the problem is not guns. The problem is people. Trying to restrict people from being murderes is great. But I do not think guns are the problem. Sure we could increase our regulation on getting access to guns, which I believe would help to a degree. However people willing to murder people is the problem.
Trying to address that problem is massive, and our responsibility, and has to be looked at systematically in our culture. Guns are the symptoms.
One of the solutions that I would propose is a government that holds firm and somewhat harshly the enforcement of laws - to all people regardless of race, cultural background, and economic state. The government is not responsible to be merciful, thats individual peoples responsibility.
I think a look into Saudi Arabia's enforcement of their laws would help.
*I do not agree with Saudi Arabian laws - rather their enforcement of their laws is the point on want to make!
For example, if you smuggle drugs into Saudi Arabia they kill you.
harsh? effective?
you can read more about Saudi Arabia law for yourself and their enforcement of their law yourself...here is some light reading
http://www.vocativ.com/underworld/crime/saudi-arabia-execution-beheading/index.html
The problem is the US government becoming social justice police
the role of the government is to protect it's citizens, not be merciful. The role of our community is to come around people and help them, get them resources, express empathy and mercy.
Not the government.
I think the US government needs to up its enforcement of its law's, and in some ways develop harsher punishments.
I think it would at least put more ownership of the problem on local communities and not on the government. The problem with these mass shootings I do not believe is guns. I believe its much bigger then that.
Some interesting points you make here. It is a very difficult subject and like you said guns may just be a symptom and not the root problem. When there are so may factors involved it is difficult to single out just one as the main cause for the problem.
With regards to the strictness and severity. When people are afraid of the consequences for committing a certain crime they are definitely less likely to commit that crime. Like the Saudi example, If one or two examples are made then the public will learn that the government is not playing around. However, the same law exists in Thailand where trafficking drugs is punishable by death, but because of corruption, drug traffickers can usually pay of police and continue on.
Communities is an interesting point. When people are more tied to their community, crime is more likely to go down because of the strong social fabric. I think this might be the most telling point. When people don't feel isolated, they are less likely to commit heinous acts.
My perception - which could be wrong is that my millennial generation feels like they are activist because of social media but in reality do close to nothing in their actual local community. Instead they are looking to federal government to take on their value system. Which is not the governments job.
I think the Saudi argument is incredibly extreme - the point being our government's role is to just enforce the law. I think if local people in local communities actually engaged their community like they engage on social media, corruption in politics would begin to get addressed, racial stigmas would start to fall apart, local business' would thrive and people would be unable to get to the point of lunacy as we have experienced here with Las Vegas. This takes time, patience, and individuals steeping to the plate.
I hope to keep that trend moving in Fort Collins Co...
Really appreciate this dialogue -
We have a Certain Guarantee against Cruel and Unusual Punishment and the American People are both Merciful and forgiving as our past has shown and as the current actions of those that represent Lawful Governance by Consent AND inheritage have so nobly demonstrated, and as this is a Government of the People by the People and for the People, indeed this Government is one much more of mercy and JUST(appropriate)ICE and not one of INJUSTICE, IMMORALITY, or HARSHNESS which are the platitudes of the Intolerant, the Indiferent and those without Sensibility or the wisdom of man's imperfection, and as such only goes to deprive those who committed harm of any and all atonement, drives sentiments of Equal Quality as Injustice, Immorality and Harshness of the Law from the guilty and harboring them on their fellow man, harboring the very acid to forgiveness and hardly in the sentiment of restitution.
The US Government doesn't have enough enforcement? It needs to make more examples, to victimize more people and to imposes harsher stricter licenses, because saudi arabia has the brutality of someone that exhibits zero empathy or sympathy to those that err?
Controversial topic Jason. I think it's important as an American to not give up any of our rights. Even if the argument is " for our own protection". I think that the gun violence is a symptom of the problem, not an actual gun problem. One thing that cannot be denied is that we have a greed and corruption problem here in America. On another note , we simply do not do a good enough job taking care of our mentally ill. It takes a mentally ill person to commit mass homicide. If we address the root causes we can solve the symptom related problems
I think that is a great idea. The mentally ill need to receive better treatment for sure. When people have physical injuries they go to the doctor right away. But when people have a mental injury the stigma associated with it keeps a lot of people from seeking proper help. This needs to change.
As a Canadian I know that we have stricter Gun Laws and there seems to be less gun violence but as we see lately there are many modes of destruction and the automobile is becoming the weapon of choice. Anything can become "weaponized" so we need to get to the Root cause of this violence. What could possibly inspire a human being to cause such destruction. Why are people doing this ? Obviously they have no respect for human Life or any life or anything and there must be something done in Society to teach people that this One and Only Life is precious. Whether you are Religious or Atheist you must come to realize that this Life is a gift (from God or the Universe) to be respected. Less guns may prevent some deaths but if Humans have no respect for Human Life then this problem will only grow worse.
Yeah, What happened out West was terrible and you are right that if people want to cause harm to others they will definitely find a means of doing it. I think social ties and a sense of community goes a long way to preventing these occurrences. When someone feels isolated and alone with nothing left to lose, then it is much easier for them to commit these heinous acts. That being said a gun is designed to destroy/kill/inflict damage, that is its purpose whereas a car is a method of transportation. People using spoon or car analogies and comparing them to guns are missing the point of what a gun is and was made for doing.
Don't get me wrong. Guns are designed to kill quickly and machine guns are designed to kill many people very quicky. My point is that the mind set that allows one human being to kill another human is the problem here.
Yeah we can definitely agree on that. I just think that if we make it more difficult for people with these intention to get their hands on these weapons, the public's overall well being will go up
No they aren't missing any points:
Guns are made to Destroy/Kill/Inflict Damage so that when someone decides to Destroy/Kill/Inflict Damage they can do so Effortleslly. It works both ways: The ones that was to Destroy will be met with their own Destruction by equally proficient tools as theirs.
The caveat is that should people wish to act in that way therefore people can appropriately respond. It's you who I think doesn't understand what guns are designed to do. Guns are designed as the Proper Means to Eliminate or Neutralize Threats. Therefore Guns are Designed to Protect Life.
The bill of rights was amended to the Constitution for the united States and among the enumerated Rights, the right to own guns was largely for National Security, in the sense that should anyone try to mess with Virginia, the Virginians could easily gather up and create a militia of the people by the people for the people, it was not about directly Defending Yourself because you inherently couldn't make any argument about Gun Control during those times, 100 years previously it was a Given that people have that right, but it was/is Explicitly about Defending against Oppression as it enunciates:
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.
The main, primary, chief purpose is For the Security of a Free State.
Any pandering to the contrary or insinuation that this right doesn't guarantee the people to keep Nukes or Integrally Silenced Weapons, or any other "Illegal" weapon and anything and everything that could be construed as a weapon and utilized for the purpose explicitly stated in the Simple, Straight Forward, Statement that was Ratified to the Constitution, when it explicitly states that "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed as a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state.", is erroneous and without reason because this was explicitly a guarantee Against Federal Regulations and even above that because this is a Right owed to the people, and not to Federal Employees, nor US Citizens, nor any other Foreign Agents and the people, as in Virginian, Nevadian, etc, only they can ratify such Rights, as it was The People that the Constitution is for, and it's the People that have not Recognized any such Dual Citizenship, and no oath of office stands as valid To the People, For the People have only One Constitution, and it's Titled: The Constitution for the united States of America for a reason, and not The Constitution of the United States which is a Corporate Charter and denotes both citizens and Persons, one Title of Servitude and one a Straw Man Corporate Fiction, Purely for Fraudulent Purposes of Defrauding Americans, through the Semantic Deceit of the sound-alike Constitutions, and imposing the Color of the Law, where a crime is wrangled into Legalese Legislation and nothing is permitted without permits and everything is stipulated if you contract with the permit issuers, in so much as making you a subject, and this is done under the Appearance of Law (that is why all it takes is the Appearance of Justice) and as such NO US Congress is a Continental Congress and no Mere Corporate Sound-Alike charter is our Lawful Government, I am no Citizen and no Servant to the State and I am my own man and I do not recognize any authority of man over me and the Government of the People guarantees me nothing if there are no People to be present and accounted for at Roll Call, but those words are speaking in the Context of Defending oneself implicit in the predecessor English Bill of Rights, and in this context it is refined by Expressing the need of a militia for the security of a Free State, which is exactly why we have no more freedoms but only Equal Civil Liberties, and why these mass shootings are not the subject of Security of a Free State, but the subject of detective (NOT-PO-LICE) work and inquiry, and a crime of people and not an act of States which a militia is concerned with.
Okay, some of what you're saying is a little over my head but let me see if I understand what you're saying. The original constitution that was made to protect the people of America no longer does what it was set out to do? You see yourself identifying more as an individual rather than a citizen and you also identify more within your state than the actual whole of America?
I do see your point with invalid legislation being made by people who do not represent their people properly. I have always had a problem with many laws that have been enacted by the few as they really don't help out the "people" the government would have you believe.
But back to the gun issue, you see it more as a necessity against the state? how do we prevent these mass shootings where many innocent people lose their lives?
You cannot prevent mass shootings as much as you cannot prevent people murdering people en mass with any other things, cars, poison, microwaves, electricity etc.
How do we prevent assholes like that one that killed all those people?
A well armed society is a polite society.
What has happened is that ever since the Civil War, which was neither declared nor marked as concluded by the signing of a peace treaty, is that the Federal Government has been working in a Private Capacity and hasn't taken the Oath to the Constitution but to the Corporate Charter that was enacted in 1868, which parrots the actual Constitution.
http://presscore.ca/two-constitutions-in-the-united-states-1st-was-illegally-suspended-in-favor-of-a-vatican-crown-corporation-in-1871
Back to the point I was making, the original Bill of Rights that the Protestants won from the King, ensured that people have a right to bear arms for their defense. The Bill of Rights which was added years after the Constitution was first finalized (which goes to show that the document wasn't "for the people of America", as some of the language explicitly states by excluding Slaves, and Natives from the political process and it took some years to tack on the Bill of Rights which secures our freedoms on paper/principle) was amended in a time where you would have been seen as a LUNATIC to even mention Gun Control and the reason for our Second Amendment Right being worded as it is, was to Record that the people have the right to Band Together in order for the security of a Free State.
The conversation about the Legitimacy of the US Congress and the lack of quorum for over one and a half centuries precludes all other issues of "government", without that most critical and important of fact I will not participate, as 2/3's of people who aren't Registered to Vote equally express their choice of not participating, in The Majority Voting to Eat the Minority for Dinner. Mob Rule is amoral, it's as if people truly have no sense of right and wrong. And this is evident because the Majority Vote to NOT-VOTE, and then how is that DEMOCRACY?!
the 12% vote to eat the rest for dinnerthe ones that conspire make all the rules, absurdity.Nobody can "PREVENT" anything. Nobody can Guarantee Tomorrow (hence why contracts cannot exist in a rational society, SMART or otherwise)
We cannot prevent things like the rain, we can however prevent mass shootings. I refuse to believe otherwise. If we couldnt prevent them then mass shootings would be a worldwide epidemic and not just a mostly american problem.
If the the most lethal weapon on the market is a hunting rifle or a pistol, that is a large step towards preventing a mass shooting
Reality doesn't rest on your refusal.
Who is preventing Mass Shootings? Norway? Can any people that gather prevent against one sicko?
The legal market. Because the market is indeed not under ANYONE'S THUMB, and certainly not because some assholes that don't even have the credentials to be public officials claim otherwise. If the most lethal weapon on the market was a machete, someone would still have a gun, with magnet, or someone could melt styrofoam in gasoline and make a 55 gallon drum and with a nice pump and some sweet nozels make a napalm gun that could touch everything and anything in 100 ft. They could remote control cars through crowds, they could implement a remote control car with napalm gun, they could do this without anything but Basic everyday things.
Prevent that.
Maybe it is just the American culture that has become this way
Does this happen in developed nations?
How do you explain the case of Australia after it's mass shooting in 1996 and subsequent ban on long guns? There has not been a single mass shooting since. That sounds to me like the Australian government took preventative measures.
Why are you asking if it happens in developed nations? As if crazy people CAN be prevented from doing CRAZY things by words on a piece of paper! Wait, it's indeed crazy to be compelled by WORDS on a piece of paper:
Good men don't need laws and Evil man will act regardless of the law.
People have improvised their Spree Killing, hardly anything has changed, those that are easy victims still fall prey because guns are villainized, which means only those with guns (aka a police who goes rogue, a military armorer going bonkers) can do so.
Preventive measures would be arming everyone to the teeth and educating everyone in their use, but the only thing that you'll be preventing is 99% of crime and without that what good are cops and armies.
Because supposedly America is a developed nation. You are talking about anarchy and things out of fictional tales.
Right, Australia still has problems, but what they don't have is a gun problem and that is the issue at hand in this discussion.
Do you really think that arming everyone to the teeth would create a peaceful and working society? DO you think you'd feel safe walking around at night knowing everyone is packing weapons in their pants. Do you think that countries where citizens don't own weapons are living in a police state?