Topic: All people Should have the right to own Guns in our Society (Read 617 times)

I strongly believe that the person who created this thread is from Africa and in Africa we have not given the opportunity to own gun so many of us don't even know how to fire or shoot gun so if the opportunity is given then everyone is a suspect and if they near the door in the night the guy will release the bullet to the person.

If Africans are given the opportunity to carry gun then the killing will be very high because the angry families will go and kill the families that have done something against them to pay back. So I also disagree with Op. Though Americans are allow to carry gun.

All you are saying is that people are bad at heart. Even if such is true, people are smart enough that they won't start little wars with other people for nothing. Nobody wants a war where they can't win, and where they might get hurt. But they need their guns to protect them from the crazy people out there, and especially the people in government.

But you can definitely keep a gun to keep your family safe. It is especially important to keep women safe, women are the most stigmatized these days. Especially bad people are increasing in number, they mainly get the support of others and big powerful people to perpetrate massive violence on the public. I think it's the right thing to do to support families from this abuse, and it's the right thing to do with guns. But the buddy must be a licensed one known as a valid buddy-gun.

There is some policy that is not encouraging in the society so whoever that implement the law that everybody should using gum that person will harm the society because if everyone should apply use of Born To The Society that means nobody is safe and there is every possibility that whoever that you offend will harm you so I don't think that that idea is a wise one

^^^ In countries without guns or gun problems, it's only that way because of the gun freedom in the US. Government people in those countries are docile because they are afraid that US gun freedom would spread to their people if they introduced worse 'slavery' than is already there, in their countries... even though those countries claim they are free. They aren't free. You can tell. How? They don't let their people freely have guns.

In a country that allows automatic weapons, how does one get those weapons off the street? In America, the people holding such guns would band together against government if government tried to do this. Then the rest of the people without guns would band together against government for fear of losing their rights in other ways.

The Garden of Eden is gone.

If a person has served their time for their crime then they have a right to walk free among society the same as any other citizen unarmed and no longer dangerous and call the police like every other citizen if threatened by someone who has a weapon so the police can come to the scene authorised to use whatever force nescessary to engage with the person who is threatening this person with a weapon.

This happens in the UK for example where gun violence is low or in Ireland where the police force in unarmed and gun violence is non existent. Civilised societies should have no need to walk the streets carrying guns like the wild west and police officers should feel comfortable walking their streets among the public unarmed with only non lethal weapons.

All automatic weapons should be taken off the streets and banned from public use. It should become difficult or next to impossible to obtain such weapons. Only a shotgun or rifle should be available for citizens and their well armed militia should be a legitimate well vetted militia made up of elected officials,members of the public and police and whatever they decide upon with their automatic military style weapons lawfully kept in a proper barracks.

The only thing I am saying is, if the courts are going to let a criminal shooter live and walk free among society, then protect him. Otherwise, execute him. But be sure he is really guilty, first.

Nope. Disarm all criminals who used guns for their crimes and then criminals might have less incentive to use guns to commit crimes although that is doubtful as criminals who have used guins to commit crimes and wish to commit more crimes will undoubtedly find an alternative source to supply them with a gun.

The police should also be disarmed by the looks of things in the US these days.

It would be best if all automatic weapons were banned for public use and firearm licences only issued for shotguns and rifles while disarming all uniformed police officers and only arming specific units that can back up uniformed officers if need be or having a gun in police car that can only be accessed remotely by calling dispatch if a violent crime is being reported where a weapon is being used. Otherwise uniformed officers should have only use of non lethal weapons such as pepper spray or taser.

But think about this. Many people who did a crime with a gun, and as a consequence have been disallowed from owning a gun, how are they going to be protected? I mean, everybody makes a mistake sometime. So, when is the time for such a person to be protected? Especially if he paid for his crime by community service or prison?

I think that government should assign a police officer to every person who the government has disallowed from using/owning guns. The police officer should be there 24/7/365 to protect the guy, because government took his self-protection away, and needs to protect him to keep from being bad guys themselves.

People who have used a gun to commit a crime in the past should never have a right to own a gun. There should be consequences of their choices and actions. Freedom to own a gun should only be given to those who have not used a gun to commit crime if they choose to have a gun. In an ideal society there should be no need to own a gun for any reason however we live in a wicked world so this is not the case unfortunately.

If there is gun ownership then people should be educated on the rules and regulations and use of a gun before being issued a licence to own a firearm. Gangsta rapper types who wish to own a firearm should be vetted the same as anyone else before being allowed to walk into walmart and pick up a 12 guage or whatever they want to own.

I think if there is a lack of social security, it's that everyone in our society needs to have guns, especially the adults. Because guns keep us safe in many cases, when people are in some kind of trouble. So I also think that all adults should own guns for their own safety.

Before giving firearms to every citizen, be sure the citizens are mentally matured enough to handle firearms responsibly. I live in an environment where the possession of firearms is not legalised, yet crimes resulting from the use of firearms are on the increase. Imagine a situation where everyone is allowed to own one, there will be more insecurity and jungle justice will be on the rise too because everyone is obviously a suspect.

The duty of protection of lives and properties should be left in the hands of the police.  They have been trained for this, therefore they should be able to help maintain peace and order. If the government desperately wants to ensure that its citizens are safe, then they should equip the military and paramilitary so well to do their jobs effortlessly.

^^^ People don't often hear about the lives that are saved by guns in the US. Although there is info about it that you can find if you look for it, THE MAIN POINT is totally hidden. What is the main point? Projections about what would happen if the people did NOT have guns.

Without guns in the hands of good citizens, all kinds of shooters would come out of hiding, and do mass shootings all over the place. It's not the fact of average people protecting themselves with guns. It's the fact that a few of them do, and mass-murdering shooters don't know which of the people would.


Daniel Perry Pardoned in Texas for Shooting AK47-Wielding BLM 'Protester'

---

https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=64453
The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles approved a pardon for Army Sgt Daniel Perry on Thursday after spending over a year investigating his shooting of a BLM "protester" armed with an AK-47.

Perry, a veteran who was working as an Uber driver, shot AK-47 wielding BLM "protester" Garrett Foster during the Summer of Floyd in 2020 after Foster together with a mob of BLM protesters swarmed him in his car in the middle of a public street.


The man who defended himself against BLM rioters was indicted today a year after the incident in yet another example of how illegitimate our justice system is

Army Sgt Daniel Perry was driving Uber when rioters mobbed his car and pointed a gun towards him.


The media describes mobbing his car and pointing a gun towards him as "motioned with the assault rifle for Mr. Perry to lower his window", as if one could tell that https://kxxv.com/hometown/texas/fort-hood-soldier-who-fatally-shot-austin-protester-garrett-foster-indicted-on-multiple-charges...

Shortly before being killed Garrett made it clear why he was there.


Another BLM rioter shot at Perry shortly after he defended himself. Perry then fled and immediately called police upon getting to safety.

Texas is a stand your ground state, but it looks like that doesn't apply if you defend yourself from those with a system approved ideology
...

---

If everyone has the right to own a firearm, this means that it will be easier for criminals to own firearms. So what's the point if people have firearms but criminals also have firearms? This would be dangerous and worsen the chaos. Moreover, if criminals have firearms, they will be braver and more sadistic in committing criminal acts.

Let's take it from the US which has regulations regarding firearms which in my opinion are not too strict.



Graph of firearm deaths in the US, 1999 - 2021.

Suicide → Suicide
Homicide → Murder, criminal act. Varies, such as hitman, robbery, etc.

So in my opinion everyone has the right to own a firearm, but it must be subject to strict regulations and proven by psychological tests. That will reduce the risks as I mentioned above.

How about right to have an access to affordable mental care and universal income instead? Countries where you need those guns are are often more or less unstable, because they have huge gap between poor and rich class, causing violence and bad neighbourghoods.

Desperation, fear, angst and lack of safety net, causes people to lash out and they will take justice in their own hands or deal with emotions by aggression. Put guns to this mix and fear of getting hit from a stray bullets will grow also. People who like to carry guns often do it because of the fear of their safety. But for some reason they don't trust anything that deals with root problems and is actually efficiently growing safety.

If that's the only thing you can think of, please don't own a gun yourself.



That's the point. You simply dropped the part where I said:


What are military people? What are police? They are people. Sure, they are trained. But anybody can be trained.

By the time the police get there, the crooks are long gone... by far, most of the time. If the people had guns, the crooks would be taken care of on the spot. Why can't an average citizen use plausible deniability, "I feared for my life," like the cops do?

The Sheriff is in the Constitution; the police are not. Let's do it the way it is supposed to be done:
1. No standing army in times of peace;
2. The militia (citizenry) as military, having the guns;
3. Get rid of the expense of police who mostly just antagonize the citizenry.

So they're not supposed to train. In case of a conflict they're given a weapon for the first time in years and asked to go and shoot someone with it.


It would be literally suicide to work as a police officer. You wouldn't have a gun but everybody else would, but it's you that works in law enforcement. How are you going to enforce anything facing an armed criminal while being unarmed yourself? Also, imagine the police officer being able to carry a gun at home but not at work.

All people Should have the right to own Guns in our Society


The title says "All." What does 'all' mean? It means ALL.

There are 3 classes of people who shouldn't be able to own or even touch guns or weapons - US, basically. They are:
1. Violent criminals who have been convicted of violent crime, with or without using a gun;
2. Politicians running for office or already in government office;
3. Military people, as long as they are inside the borders of the country.

An addition would be police, based on two things:
1. Only if the local people allowed their police to have guns;
2. Only within the borders of the locality wherein they were authorized as police.

The only exception would be the county sheriff and his(her) deputies. They could own all the guns they wanted.

The general public and the populace should be required to own guns, as long as they didn't fall into one of the above classifications of people who couldn't own or touch guns.

Op sincerely I don’t support this ideas of people having guns in their homes because it will increase the crime in the society . Possession of firearms by unauthorised persons does more harm than good and can lead to turmoil and constant killing of innocent citizens . I don’t really know your country maybe This might work well in your country but in my country I will not advice any government to allow everyone to have access to firearms because it will surely lead to disaster .Most times politicians will give out gun during an
election to political tugs and after election the innocent citizens will be in danger because of constant violence, robbery and vandalism, however ,Op I totally disagree with this your idea.

Funny enough, I think people in the United States has grown used to it, having a very pissed off neighbor who happens to own a lot of guns as well, and they do not pay any attention to it. It is fascinating how gun culture in that country works, in your country, if you had someone like that in your neighborhood and if you knew they got weapons within their reach, then you would never dare to get close to them and you may event feel tempted to call the police on them and their family, but in the USA he is just enjoying his second amendment right, in the same way you could, if you wanted.
It is possible to live in a peaceful neighborhood where all people there happen to own guns, there is where the good versus bad gun with a gun debate kicks in.
The law does not care whether one is a good or a bad person, as long as one has not committed a crime, there is entitledment to have guns, the only failure in that system is how bad things and shootings are supposed to happen first, before one can identify who the bad guy is.

Gun crime hasn't increased. The thing that has increased is the advertising about gun crime. When you look at all the criminal gun activity, ALL OF IT, you will see that it's the use of guns that have stopped crime more than making crime.

Government wants to disarm the people. People without guns are no threat to a wicked, evil government. So, this same government that advertises that Trump is bad, is advertising that guns are bad.

It would be a wonderful world if there wasn't any criminality. But that isn't going to happen. Let's stop gun crime at the source; good people with guns stopping that bad people.

Google "police brutality" and see how many hits you get; hundreds of thousands. Millions? Are cops good? Some are, just like any other people. But bad cops often use their authority to do bad things. Do you want to be unprotected from those bad guys who have guns?

I have noticed that gun crime have increased in the United States and it was due to the liberty for  common citizens to have their own guns. The government have to tackle ways on limited the right to the use of guns and ammunitions by citizens.
Crime would always increase with time when it seems like everybody is holding a gun which could be a sense of self defense but that might be more than that. Some still use it for atrocities and cause conflicts to others.

Since your country has the highest number of criminals then you must use weapons in self defense, but the weapons must be licensed. And of course the government should keep the people of its country calm and reduce the crime rate, all these things will be controlled by the government. Because it is the duty of a government to govern the people of its country properly, I agree that it is better to use licensed guns for self defense and family protection if the number of bad and dirty people increases in the area.

Nope, not everyone could control their self so I don't agree with it.
So many people could easily be triggered so it would really be scary if everyone would have a gun.
Just imagine having a KAREN or Racist near your place would really be scary for everyone in the neighborhood.

There is some statement that is not suppose to be discussed in this platform because it is only the military people that have the last sense that is authorized to make use of arms and ammunition so individual or civilian it's not authorized to make me use of gun so I don't know why this discussion is coming to this place because we are not a military school so I think let us try to bring up what is reasonable and what that we profit us in future

So if government and police are too slow as a solution to deal with bad people with guns, how come many of the safest countries within the first world and the civilized nations are those who have heavy restrictions on the ownership of guns by their citizens?
Take Japan for example, people there are not allowed to have guns because of the treaties signed after the defeat of the empire of Japan in the second world war, and yet, the rates of violence in Japan are very low, so is crime in general, mass shooting as non-existant when compared to the United States, etc. They do not have handgins and seem not to need them.
Though, there is no doubt there is bad people and criminals in all places in the world, but it would seem the criminals in Japan could be having a rough time trying to arm themselves and paying premium prices for ammo, instead in USA where it is as easy as buying candy when one has turned 18 years old.

The unhinged weapon culture in that country is part of the problem which could lead to tragedies like that we all saw in Uvalde two years ago.

The problem here is you'd have to check every gun owner each year because you can in fact develop mental illness later in your life, after passing your gun tests and owning it for several years.

Personally I love guns and if I had to choose between two extremes of nobody owning a gun and everybody owning a gun, I'd choose the latter, but I agree that a gun is a double edged sword. Having it at home gives you a sense of security and allows you to defend yourself, but it's a dangerous tool that can cause accidents. You leave it in the open and your child shoots someone, or you get scared of something and fire, thinking there's an intruder, but it could be a drunk neighbor who came back from a party and entered the wrong house.

You can't take back time once you fire at someone.

^^^ The point is that there will always be bad shooters with guns. What is the only way to combat them? Guns in the hands of good people. Government - police - is way too slow to stop bad shooters.

We are luck when there are enough good people with guns around us, so that we don't have to have guns if we don't want them.

I agree that guns should be used mainly for target practice. I've seen issues about hunting and some of the incidents have become viral because it's not necessary to hunt specifically for endangered species. But what can we help with that? Nothing. Whatever the gun owners do wanna do with their guns, they'll do it. If it's for target practicing and it has become a hobby, that's much better but we don't hold the emotions of every gun owner and that's where the other harmful incidents start to happen.
It's true that most people don't have guns just like me but this is really a situational matter for most of the people especially those that are in a dangerous neighborhood. I don't know which state it is on the US to be specific and other countries as well. I hate it when I see news that there's a shooter that amok in schools and able to take down innocent lives. They shouldn't do it or if they wanna do and they lose their emotions and intellects, better not to harm anyone and do it to themselves.

I agree with you. Not everyone should be allowed to own guns in our society, because not everyone is in sane conditions to take a responsability like that. We have already seen unstable people commiting carnage at schools and public areas due to past traumas they couldn't solve, so they became cold serial killers, while others neglected their guns, storing it carelessly, so their children had access to it and ended accidentaly hitting themselves or people around.

It's definitely not possible to allow everyone to own guns. A rigorous mental exam is a must, so the risks of having the situations mentioned above can decrease considerably, while allowing mentally stable people to defend themselves and their families, when necessary, if they wish to have a gun under their possession.

This that you say is good.

Guns are for hunting or target practice (competitions). If everybody viewed it this way, and if everybody was safe in their use and storage of guns, we wouldn't have threads like this one.

If 100% of the populace owned guns, most of them wouldn't use them against other people. But the bad shooters don't know this. So, just the knowledge that everybody had a gun would scare them into not using theirs in a bad way.

If nobody else had a gun, the bad shooters would never stop. Why not? They wouldn't have fear of anybody except those few like themselves.

Most people don't have guns. But bad shooters don't know who has one and who doesn't. So they are fearful enough to not try to find out the hard way... by using theirs. Rather, they go to places like schools, because they know there aren't any guns there. They know they can get away with it there. Of course, with all the school shootings in the last few years, schools now have special protection. And the bad shooters know it.

I understand where you are coming from but I am in a place that I can't think of something like that and that's why my attitude is like that. But I am very much open with the scenarios that can potentially happen to me if ever I visit some unknown neighborhood and places for me. I don't want to think that much about my family but I knew how it feels to lose someone with that scene because I've lost one brother of mine but fortunately, not with this kind of violence but more of a peaceful passing away. And that's what I am believing until now, I'm living at peace without owning one but who knows if I retaliate if somebody tries to do harm on me. I might run as I've said or I might have my revenge, I don't know because I don't want to think about it and I am just cherishing the peaceful living of this place that soon I am going to live. They're not warfreak and triggerhappy but it's a different ambiance that I don't like either and that's why I am just living and adjusting to them. But I won't ask for more compared to almost every neighborhood that owns a gun.

There is a lot to be said for your attitude. I mean, loving the shooter so much that you would rather be maimed or killed than kill or maim. But what about your family? If the shooter comes into your house and wants to kill your children or parents or brothers and sisters, are you going to say, "Have at it, shooter?" And especially when your dying kids say, "Daddy, it hurts bad."

And I'd day without knowing who killed me but hey, it's in the city where a lot of houses are in each other and a lot of blocks that the shooter can't find me easily. Just kidding but yeah, that's the likely the scenario but I'd live on what I am believing about living with what I have and how I'd die.

That's why it's still a weapon that can do harm more than the good. Because even if you use it for self defense, it's either you will be hit or the person that's trying to attack you. But as crazy as it seems nowadays, we have to protect ourselves but for someone like me, I'm glad that I am living in a neighborhood that there's not a lot of gun owners or I just don't see them because they're hiding in the shadows and they don't want to get revealed that they're owning one. Thus, if they do, then they're all responsible gun owners.

Guns have to be just in the hands of mentally stable people, everyone mentaly stable must have the right to have a gun, that means that we need replace the guns paper permit to a psychiatric exam to evaluate the future gun owner, with this solution we wont be a dystopian society!

This matter is very much debatable. You can just take your side and you can still be right. But it is better applied country by country based. But for US it has been working for them but it seems that the misuse is becoming high or the media has started to report the exact things that happen. How do mentality ill people actually get access to gun. There should be a well monitored system in the gun shop to ascertain that gun doesn't get to the hands of children, the sick and the drunk.

In a society where people are not allowed to carry arms, the bad eggs still carry it there by making them selves more powerful than those who decided to be law abiding.

Don't put words in my mouth. You said that it's the reason why people get killed, so I countered that by showing you that murders have literally nothing to do with the possession of firearms. There are countries with almost no guns but high rate of homicides and countries with very high gun ownership and low homicides. I don't think that you can assume that owning a gun will not get you killed, but not owning it will also not increase your chances of staying alive.


Would you rather face a skilled marksman unarmed, or armed? There are always be people better than you, be it with hand to hand combat, knives, or firearms, but I'd rather face an opponent (skilled or unskilled) with a firearm than without it. Chances are you both hit each other and that will save your family, or friends at the cost of your life, rather than you all dying there because you were all unarmed.

Everyone is allowed to own a gun but you must ha e a license from the government to make it legal, and that is where the problems lies. If everyone should own a gun, it will become a street war and crime rate will be very high. However, if as guns are not legalized, guns cannot be taken out from the streets because corrupt leaders will always put them in the streets.

If you have a license gun then it becomes for self defense, and not for illegal activities. There are some people that the moment they lay their hands on guns, they get possessed by the gun, and do all sort of evil with it.

But who are 'they'? In a free society, if 'they' force people to not have guns, then is it a free society?

Further, how are they going to stop people from having guns. They might get shot if they try.

In a society where everybody has a gun, the mentally unstable and the bad guys will be dead. Society will kill them. The relatives of a mentally unstable person will have to take control of their mentally unstable relative - if they love him - to keep him from using a gun in a way that will get him shot.

Training should start with the parents training their children at a young age.




What keeps a person safe is what is legal.

My sister came home from work one evening (in Phoenix, AZ) and found her house broken into. Luckily she wasn't home. She called the cops, but it took them 8 hours to get there.

Trust God, and back up your trust with your gun.





EDIT: Slamgun - https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=slam+gun AND https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZG6Y5TIDJMg

Popularize the use of guns for self-defense and do not make them easily available. If you want to use them, you also need to go through some training programs or censorship from competent authorities.

I agree that the appearance of many criminals makes us need to take more precautions, but the responsibility is great on those who carry out justice such as the police, so no matter what society we are in, we should put our trust in them. Trust in law enforcement. But there are some situations where we may have to improve many other skills to defend ourselves. To me, truly lethal weapons should only be considered for self-defense. However, poor security is not everywhere, so if you live in a high-crime area, do what you feel is safe but still legal.

They cant allow everyone to hold gun in the society except through license, that will enable then to verify and know if the individual has the enough reason why he should hold a gun, if he should be allowed to hold one after seen to be mentally fit and stable, also, there are requirements that will be made and must be fulfilled for someone to be able to be granted the license to hold a gun, if every conditions are made, then they may allow for the grant of the law.

Shot in the back while running.     

Yeah, that seems to be a situation that your friend won't have any other choice because of the area. But fortunately, I know areas that are peaceful but livelihood there is limited and that's why I am saving up for my retirement to live there someday and when everything is up and good for me, I can have my passive income that will come to me while living the best life that I can. What matters to me is I'd live peacefully and I really have no plan of carrying one and I just treat it as a costly thing as well whether with registrations and stuff and as well as maintaining it.

My logic there is, you're a law abiding citizen but you anticipate that something might happen to you. Just as the hitmen that carry weapons, you also carry one so you might attract the same judgement. That's for me and what I believe so, quite confusing but this world is crazy. But I know that we have to protect ourselves with any potential danger but I wouldn't chose to go with hand on hand combat through guns. I'm a coward, I'll just avoid and run any potential danger while and until I can.

So if anyone has a gun they are less likely to get killed? What if both parties have the gun at the same time and one who got the skills and reflexes better chance of surviving here which is obviously going to be someone who is doing this as a profession not just an average citizen. This makes sense only if government agree that they are incompetent of providing security to their citizen so there by not collecting any taxes from their citizen.

It could be you indeed you want to be alone and leave other alone with their own business, but unfortunately there are societies which such peaceful living is not such an easy option to pick for people and their neighbors.
I have got a friend who is a very good example of it, he is from the United States and he is a black person who does not own any weapons, after Trump managed to win the presidency of the country the people of the extreme right started to get more comfortable with showing off their racism against people like my friend. He friend wanted to be left alone and he would not bother anyone, but he felt so scared he started to seriously consider to get a handgun for his own protection.
All you have to do is out yourself in the place of someone like my friend, someone living around people who is constantly threating his self, because of the color of his skin. In that context, there will be people who do not like guns, but do not want the other side to be the only ones armed either.

By the way, I think the Bible means those who live by the sword, will die by it. I mostly apply to those who profit of death, like hitmen and cartel members. Does not have anything to do with lawabidding citizens having their guns safely locked or safely being carried.

While I understand where this is coming from, it is disturbing to think of it. It is scary for everyone to have access to gun because it will be more than just defending yourself of crime. Some people with anger issues will pull the trigger in one second. Some people will shoot themselves over arguments. I have watched various videos on how people in the US shoot others like it’s nothing. That is just too cold. Instead, the government should provide better security and look for ways to reduce the crime. Because it’s just a war when there’s criminals with guns and there’s you with a gun as well.

The rate at which crime is increasing this days is really high and the use of fire arms to intimidate people and take away their money and their jewelries and other valuables, fire arms have been used by a lot of people to commit some social vices but we shouldn't take fire arms to be legalized because the level of havoc it will create will be enormous because they will be handled in a wrong way and use it to take advantage of others. With the level of atrocious nature of humans it will be difficult to make the use of gun open to everybody.

I get that some folks believe having guns around makes places safer.  And yeah, for certain folks and situations, that's reasonable - if you live way out in the boondocks or want protection.  but insisting we'd all be better off if everyone packed heat wherever they went? I call shenanigans.

Guns ain't toys.  People lose their cool, even good folks.  Add firearms to those flare-ups and things go sideways real fast.  Just look at the stats - more guns typically means more problems not less.  More accidents.  More suicides.  More shootouts over fender benders and family spats.  I mean, cmon. 

Plus, places with strict limits on carrying guns around tend to be safer overall.  So this more guns equal more safe theory doesn't really hold water in my book.  I respect responsible gun owners, but thinking we'd live in some polite utopia if every last citizen strapped on a six-shooter before leaving the house every morning? That's some serious wishful thinking.

Every owning a personal gun is not a way of reducing crime in the society,  instead it will increase crime more because everyone would want to take laws into their hand. If everyone gets access of having gun, when someone offends you instead of taking the matter legally what comes into your mind next is to take laws into your hands .
This is not a good idea at all, even now that most people don't have fun to themselves the level at which crim is being committed is very high,  then imagine when their are guns everywhere, this will even cause people to be living in fear because you may not know what will even be the next action.

You present your point of view from a very limited point of view that does not include the entire scene. It is true that weapons are useful in confronting any attempted assault with high crime rates, but you forgot that prevention is achieved by reducing the rates of high crime and not only through individual methods of confronting it.
Let's take the United States, for example, where individual possession of firearms is legally permitted (the stringency of laws varies from one state to another). In the United States, areas with a high rate of gun ownership are the same areas where armed robberies and theft are high. The toll of gun violence in the United States is estimated at approximately $100 billion annually, in addition to the costs related to awareness to avoid and prevent gun violence.
https://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(15)00072-0/abstract

The law allowing the possession of firearms may be useful in combating crime individually, but we should not forget that the criminals themselves can benefit from the same laws and it becomes easy for them to possess weapons for the purpose of committing their crimes, and this is what studies have proven.

So are you saying that in countries with no guns there's less murders?
Let's talk about the numbers then.

Nigeria has one of the highest intentional homicide numbers in the world with 22 per 100k inhabitants a year. It also has one of the lowest gun ownership rates with only 3 per 100 people.
On the opposite side we have countries like Finland with 32 guns per 100 people but only 1.6 homicides per 100k inhabitants.

Some notable countries with very high gun ownership but very low homicide rates:
Canada
Serbia
Austria
Norway
Switzerland

Good people don't use guns for bad things. Bad people use guns for bad things.

Making guns illegal is words on paper. Words on paper only stop good people from having guns; words don't stop the bad people.

Illegal guns kill cops. There are places in the US where cops won't go because guns will kill them.

Big 230 lb. Bully can easily rape, mug and murder a 95 lb. teenage girl. But if Girly has a gun, she has a chance... even if Bully has a gun, too.

It should be a requirement that all people wear at least a .38 when they go into the public. Then bad people would all get scared, and wouldn't use their guns for fear of getting shot. The good people with guns wouldn't harm anyone; a gun is simply another tool.

To be fair, all gun toters should be required to take a course on responsible gun toting.

Possession of firearm does more bad thing than good, for example it is the reason why most people get murdered in here so instead of making it legal for everyone why not make it illegal for every citizen and let the job of securing the community into the hands of police. Obviously the illegal/black market guns will be in circulation but the long term effect will be positive.

Everybody should own a gun in a society. I think this is not a good idea because, we human beings, we're individuals with differences temper, we don't have the same temper, our tempers are high them each other. So everyone should own a gun in society, it may cause a big problem in the future because one day they may get into a misunderstanding with each other and definitely shoot a person.
Even when you see a strong society, the only people's that you can see own a firearm are those who are leaders of the society. Even those leaders most likely have licenses that they can prove the gun, but there are some various communities that having a gun is very important because of insecurities.

I think even with that change of laws about allowing every citizen to protect themselves to carry a gun. I'd still choose not to, it also varies in which neighborhood you live and I know that even you know people in your surroundings, you just don't know when these criminal minds will attack even their neighbors. But I've got this belief that if I live by the gun then I'd die with a gun and IIRC, this is also in the scriptures but that's how I think right now. Maybe, I'm getting older and I just truly want a peaceful life and I let people do their own thing so I won't get bothered and I won't bother others too.
If the state allows to carry everyone guns, there's should be more restriction on who are allowed to carry. Because as much as we can see, this isn't the type of life that we want to live with and neighborhoods that have got these kind of people, you'll also be influenced with them and instead of living peacefully, you'd live in fear because you're aware that everyone is carrying their own arm. Anyway, I might be too confused or my reasoning is too complex but that's what I think suits for me and I don't want to get into it.

You are correct OP the need of having gun is very important for self defense considering the way the the world is now expecially the country I came from, the high level of insecurity there is too much and since the government are unable to do some thing about it I think is right for everyone to have a gun but affording it is very expensive and I believe that's the most reasons most people don't have it so the government needs to do something about it because, the news of killing, arm robbery, kidnapping is always regular so in other to put a stop on all these nonsense I think is to have a personal gun with license and I believe with this crime will reduce.

Actually it stops nonsense especially with these points that you have touched at but it also has other disadvantages like killing innocently or by using it against "innocent offenders".

Moreover, in societies where guns are licenced, we have seen innocent children dying from psychos who have taken arms to harrash school and killing pupils. I'm still on the fence in this topic because the purpose of licencing guns are most times appearing to be causing more harm than individual protection.

For self-protection, indeed you must have one because we are not living in a fairytale where neighborhoods are kind and loving people, there's no such thing unless you are living with your families in the community like how we used to be 20 years ago. we don't usually find any trouble because we can settle it easily since we are just families in the community but everything changes when other people come who migrate from their cities to avoid conflicts between families and when they get to our city, they become arrogant and picking fights almost every day and when bloodshed has happened that's when I realized that no matter how good a person you are, there's a possibility that they come after you without any particular reasons, that's why you need to have guns to scare them away or protect yourself from more harms comes from these guys.

If having guns makes your life secure then already government allocation guns for their citizen. But  No Government will allow that. Each government have some lwas as well as have force to control criminal activities and violence in society. And governments only allow these force to have guns to control. If everyone have guns, then nobody will follow rules and people with high temper, can shoot anyone even for a simple matter. Thus violence will get increased. But you can your others things to protect yourself instead of having guns.

Many people agreed and many disagreed with this statement. But in my opinion, having your own guns depends on how your socity is! I mean if most of the people of your society are good and well disciplined, gentleman. Then you don't need guns. Police force is enough for to handle some criminals who wanna crime in that socity. But if your society is full of criminal, most of people have guns, crime rate already increased a lot that Police Force are failed stopped and you are in danger, then you should have to have a guns for saving your life.

government does not allow anyone to make use of gun except that that person is a military person and they gone is a registered gun so I dont know why we should be emphasizing on gun because we know that whoever that I have a gun is making use of illegal rifle because gun in any country it's not permitted to behold by civilian it is only the military not have the authority are the audacity to have a gun on their possession not a civilian like you and i

I can't agree with you at all. Not all people in any society should have the right to own guns, OP, the way you are trying to explain gun ownership is not the case, it would be the opposite. A society does not need to have guns in their homes by their own decision for crime to increase, it must be the government of a country to control crime. If you suffer from insecurity then it is the responsibility of the government of the country to provide security to your society. Having guns in the house means that people will show their strength against each other, will cause house-to-house conflict, and at some point the society will become bloody.

Actually, it is more complex than that.
In the United States it has been proved that there is a very high number of guns in hands of civilians, but there is also a very high percentage of people who do not own guns, in the end, it is about people owning a lot of guns and others who do not own any.
Now, considering we are going through rough times and suddenly there was a change of laws in your country which could allow almost anyone in your country to conceal carry handguns. What would you prefer? To be armed knowing there must be people around you keeping guns hidden or dont have anything to defend yourself?

That is one of the theories on the proponents of the rights of the people to defend themselves against any threat. It is about you being careful with the people around you because they are likely armed, but as well about criminals having a second thought on mugging you, because theh do not know whether you are carrying or not. Theories like that have led people to believe gun violence problems can be solved by providing more guns into the equation, thrus why some lawmakers in the USA want teachers to carry guns concealed in case of a school shooting.

It differs per culture and country where you at, while in the US it's mostly a common thing for every citizen to have their own guns and bring it wherever they go. I'd disagree with that, I don't want to bring this kind of thing and I'm not a trigger happy person but I just want to live and don't have any desire to carry gun on me at all times. I know that it is a dangerous times it is but there is this kind of people like me that don't feel comfortable when I have one on my pocket or bag.
While allowing everyone to carry a gun, getting a license sure is a tricky thing as well. Some people might pass to psychiatric tests that will allow them to carry and don't have some signs of being a triggerhappy but eventually, when they get involve to some ruckus and situations, that will change as our behavior is different when we're with a gun. We become braver and emotions are too happy because you'd think that by just clicking the trigger one time, it will make you superior than the others. There's no problem about using it protection but I won't get into trouble and will always plan wherever I go and will able areas that seems to be dangerous upon doing my research if I am not familiar to that area.

This is serious but to be honest I don't think owning a gun is going to reduce the rate of crime in the society rather it will increase the number of death in a day. Haven't you thought of this, someone have a little issue with another and the next thing is getting his or her gun and start shooting because of hate or anger, when authority comes in to ask why, you hear something like is a registered gun and I have my right, this isn't the way to stop crime. I can't say there's a way but the government should be able to provide security for the citizens especially places that are affected by crime, I think that can reduce the rate of crime a bit.

As I was reading this post, I was just contemplating on so many scenario of how the society would look like if everyone is in possession of firearm, it would be actually crazy no doubt, because to me their are so many crazy people out there in the streets which will definitely pull out a gun for any slit provocation against them, and their will be much more insecurities in our society than as it is today, Because people will start doing things with reckless impunity believing that nobody can stop them since they have power (gun) to counter anyone that tries to stop them, so I don't think it's a good idea for everyone to be in possession of firearms.

Lastly, why I really  think it's a very wrong move if the citizens of a state Is being armed is that, their are so many mentally challenged people out there in the streets and the ones in our homes, have you ever ask yourself what kind of havock they might cause if any firearms get into their possession? So it's best thing stay as it is, what the government should do instead is to beef up more security, and the police should be more fast in response to any security issues.

Yes it is completely unacceptable idea, many challenges relating the little license given to those in possession and few nation that tried it has course many damages. Allowing everyone to handle gun will be difficult for government to control mostly the third world countries who are struggling with their arm forces, it will be more of jungle as small provocation can leads to shooting your opponent, beside there is not specify training to be given even if, different people with different temperament a person of hot temper can't take things ease with someone with lesser temper, the multiplication of crime will keep coming on hourly basis if such is allowed.

i really don't agree with that. just imagine when everyone has the right to hold a gun, how chaotic society will be. we will see how shootings happen everywhere, maybe it's just because of a trivial matter. especially in countries where the majority of people are uneducated, it would be very risky to entrust people to hold weapons just because they want to protect themselves.

i agree that people are not allowed to hold weapons at all, but people are allowed to kill people who threaten their lives. there are many tools that can be used as a form of self-defense and i feel that they are much better than weapons.

Those people who you mention, who would lose their cool and shoot at others because frivolous things are one of the main reasons the selling and commerce of guns of any kind is supposed to be accompanied with psychological tests and also background checks on the possible purchasers.
This actually reminds me some news I saw from the United States, it was about some guy (who worked as a gun instructor) and he was driving on the highway, when he suddenly experimented road rage because some other driver passed by him on an improper manner. What was his reaction? He pulled out his handgun and emptied his magazine through his own windshield.

There is crazy and mentally ill people in all countries of the world, but not all of them have access to tools which were done specifically to kill others.
I would have not many problems with more access to guns, as long as it is regularized and people get evaluated before handing over anyone a Glock or a Beretta.

I can not agree to everybody owning a gun in any society, because people have different temperaments, someone who has anger issues can get mad at another person and decide to shoot the person because he has a gun, infact death rate will increase over time. What if the governments approves carrying pistols and shotguns by civilians, and armed robbers are carrying AK-47 riffles, which is more deadlier? I think that we'll be seeing more dead bodies everyday, because crime rates, manslaughter and murder will increase, so let's be careful what we wish for, guns are not supposed to be in the hands of everybody, only trained personnel and people who are authorized should carry guns.

You're right to say. Criminalities, oppressions and other illegal indulgences has been so terrible and going on concurrently.
Having the issued of guns access to everyone would not bring an end to this mayhems instead it'd even spread a wider range where more people would embrace all those uncalledful activities.
The best way to do away with this is the government to stay and play active role of security measures and influence the societies with penalty pronounce that any apprehended victim would have the wrath of their deeds. So if the government can take those drastic actions out in cordial places without being biased and no tempering justice with mercies with such people who engages in those activities, there'd be limitations of the discomforts being encountered in the societies.

Op be aware that gun has an evil influence which only matured minds that can tolerate certain nonsense are only fit to handle it. And if the government can grant such access to handling of guns as you make say, that would turn the world out to jungle where sporadically humans would be hunted like the hunters and the animals in the jungle.

I am personally divided on this matter about the ownership of guns by people and the impact it could have on crime and the personal security of people. On one hand, I don't like how the free ownership of guns could make even easier for people with mental problems to go postal and kill anyone in their path, as we have already see it happening in the United States, where it is a sad reality people choose to murder students in their same classrooms where they are supposed to be save and learning.
On the other hand, me being a citizen from a country where the government is very authoritarian and corrupt, I believe the situation would not be so bad here if the government was more afraid of the people they are supposed to serve, one way to reach that would be by giving people weapons and rightful ownership over those weapons and the right to defend themselves from others who mean them harm.

Having weapons can come with advantages and disadvantages, in the end, it is supposed to be a personal choice. What is not a personal choice is whether someone shoots you or not...

Completely agree. The 2nd Amendment wasn't meant to protect from crooks on the streets. It was meant to protect from government officials who were crooks, among other things. However...

The 2nd Amendment doesn't really have much to do with it. If you own guns, they are your private property. Private property rights are the important thing. If you own a gun that is outlawed by government, what is it? Government says it is a gun. But they are wrong... except if you agree with them, that is. Why are they wrong? Because they don't own your private property. Your property is what you call it, namely "private property."

If it's your property, you call it whatever you want. You can do this because it's your property. So, if you own a Howitzer in your back yard, it isn't a Howitzer. It's your private property. Government has to prove ownership or legal control in some way before they can rebrand your property as a Howitzer. But if you don't stand up to government like this, you might lose your private property, and then your freedom.

Completely disagree as we have already seen so much of gun related crimes and shooting in schools and some so called mentally unstable person going on rampage and killing spree. I think no one should have access to gun accept the relevant security services and authorities and rather we should ensure we have more trained personnel to tackle the crime and there should be enough security and safety to curb on the crimes and send the criminals behind the bar which would reduce the incidents and there is absolutely no need of guns for ordinary person. 

The fear of rising crime in our society is no joke and can't be ignored.This is why All people should have the rights to own Guns.

One can protect oneself,one's family and not bend down to anybody.

Possession of firearms often reduces home robberies and assaultive crimes like rape both by family members and strangers.

They are excellent tools for protection and self- defense.

Agree or Disagree

https://secondamendmentcenter.org/people-should-have-the-right-to-own-guns/