In the U.S., "no, you're not 'supposed' to." Elsewhere, it is, and often is.
As for "not 'supposed' to," it can and will happen anyways. Put a huge tax on it, require $100K in licenses, papers, registration etc, then start passing laws banning them in theaters, New York City, residential areas, etc. You'll wind up with 100 rich white survivalist gun owners who also own a million acres of land, 320 million gun-less civilians, and 30 million "criminals" owning guns, some of whom will kill a person in their lifetime and some who are perfectly law-abiding minus the guns part.
Because there's a lot of guns here already.
As for "not 'supposed' to," it can and will happen anyways. Put a huge tax on it, require $100K in licenses, papers, registration etc, then start passing laws banning them in theaters, New York City, residential areas, etc. You'll wind up with 100 rich white survivalist gun owners who also own a million acres of land, 320 million gun-less civilians, and 30 million "criminals" owning guns, some of whom will kill a person in their lifetime and some who are perfectly law-abiding minus the guns part.
Because there's a lot of guns here already.
If that's response to me. Let me ask questions ( I can guess the answers)
First question:
Do you think that CCW should be unrestrictive.
CCW should be allowed only after a formal training.
CCW should be allowed only after a formal training and state certification.
I am also all for education on the perils of drugs, including alcohol, tobacco, illicit drugs, and pharmaceutical drugs.
Quote
Second question:
If a gun gets stolen the owner isn't responsible for any crime that it caused
The owner only responsible for the portion of the damages.
The owner has a full responsibility.
This one is tricky. Doesn't the gun owner have a responsibility for the gun; shouldn't he keep it safe? Yet he didn't do the killing. He can't have a full responsibility, because he didn't kill anyone or rob any banks. I'm gonna have to go with partial responsibility. If a gun gets stolen the owner isn't responsible for any crime that it caused
The owner only responsible for the portion of the damages.
The owner has a full responsibility.
If someone drowns in my pool, I can be sued. Never mind that they were there without my permission and trying to rob me.
If a child is at my house who eats some pills that look like M&M's, I can be sued.
What about if someone steals my knife and uses it to commit murder? Should that be different than if someone steals my gun?
In any case, gun education would include a lengthy section on keeping guns dismantled and secure, to avoid accidental injury (child plays with gun, shoots self) and theft.
Quote
Third question:
Should be businesses be allowed to established their own rules:
1) yes, they could restrict guns in their establishments
2) no.
Is a bank a business? Should people be allowed to carry guns into banks? What about knives? Poison darts? Hammers? Glass bottles? Stump remover (stump remover, when used correctly, is explosive BTW)?Should be businesses be allowed to established their own rules:
1) yes, they could restrict guns in their establishments
2) no.
There's two sides to this, and both can end badly:
1.a A bank or other business bans guns on their property. Someone comes in and shoots up the bank. Defenseless victims.
1.b A bank or other business bans guns on their property. Someone comes in and robs the bank using a non-gun weapon.
1.c A bank or other business bans guns on their property. Criminals don't obey the law, so they bring guns in anyways. They rob or shoot up the bank.
2. A bank does not ban guns on their property. Someone comes in and shoots up the bank or tries to rob it.
At least in bad scenario 2, there are civilians who can come to the defense of themselves and others. Ultimately, I believe that it is the bank's property, and they should be able to make their own decisions. They should have security on-hand. Perhaps the security is armed and can come to the defense of themselves and others. If enough customers believe that the security is inadequate, they will use a bank which allows open-carry or has better security.
[/quote]
Did you guess correctly?
