Baton Rouge, LA My basic instinct is to be completely anti-gun. People think they're fun, but I've never seen anything really good come of a gun, and I've seen bad stuff come from them. What Bruce Willis says is probably right, though. His feeling is that if you take away the basic right to have guns, only the bad guys will be armed. Karen, 20
Marshelltown/Ames, IA People that have children should not have guns in the house under any circumstance. It sickens me to see these stories on TV about small children who found their parent's gun and either accidently shot themselves or a friend/sibling. Protecting yourself is all well and good, but you're not really protecting your family from harm if you're keeping a gun in the house. Nicole
Elk Grove, CA The closer the government gets to telling me I can't have a gun, the more I want one. Anthony, 24
Baton Rouge, LA I've never owned or been interested in guns but I understand hunters and to some extent people who think it's a good way to protect themselves. Have guns caused more than their share of headaches? Unquestionably, but I don't agree with banning them completely. Take them away from those who abuse the privilege, use them on those who really screw up. Alias Irrelevante I believe in strong gun control laws. Hunting is about the only reason I can see for owning a gun, therefore hunting rifles should be all individuals should be able to own. Laura, 34
Lowell, MA I can't see how having guns, especially hand guns benefit anyone. Any why it is easier to own a gun than own a car (or even a dog sometimes) is beyond me. You don't even have to prove that you've taken a gun safety class, that you have insurance against accidents, etc. You know, my parents had hunting rifles while I was growing up. It never occurred to me to take one of them, load it and shoot anyone or anything. Somewhere we are all responsible for the violence that's out there. With that said,There is a little conspiracy theorist inside my head that thinks if all the guns are controlled that BIG BROTHER will have no resistence. After all isn't that what the 2nd Amendment is all about, allow the general public to form militias to defend against unjust governments. Felicia, 34
Somerville, MA My thoughts is that people have a right to carry firearms, provided they are registered. I do believe there should be more regulation of firearms, so kids wont go around shooting each other. I personal belief is that people should get a dog, as opposed to getting a gun, to protect themselves. Ernest, 28
Washington, DC Individuals have a right to own guns. They also have a responsibility to insure that the general public, particularly children, are safe. Gun owners, particularly handgun owners, should be held responsible for weapons being misused and punished with hefty fines and prison sentences for such misuse. Jill, 59
Saylorsburg, PA I'm fairly ambivalent about it. . . .I think both sides are pretty extreme and have lost some perspective on the issue's central concerns. . . .My brother loves going to the shooting range with his fourteen year old son and firing off a few rounds, and he loves the fact that this bothers liberal folks like me a little. . .I understand how this could be a bit of harmless nihilistic fun kept within the proper context, but therein lies the problem, I think. . .I respect and embrace the feelings of freedom and rebel spirit that NRA folks have, but even a small bit of irresponsibility can lead to a kid getting killed, and with no regular citizens allowed to possess them the number of pointless painful deaths could be seriously reduced. . . . I don't believe I could ever own a gun myself, unless I intended to use it on myself, and then it probably wouldn't be too long after purchasing it that the issue would be irrelevant to me anyway. . . Again, I can appreciate both sides of this issue. . . mothmc, 35
Pensacola, FL I don't think that anyone should be "allowed" to own/carry a gun - regardless of their reasons, but that would be in a perfect world. Nikki, 27
Kirkham ENGLAND It doesn't really matter what anybody thinks about the situation. The correct answer is written, plain as day, in the Bill of Rights. I don't understand why people think the Bill of Rights is so hard to understand. It seems to be written pretty simply. People dig around in it and try to make it say whatever serves their purpose. Take, for example, "the right to bear arms". That sounds pretty cut and dried. But the government twists that around, saying that it was written for the informal "armies" of citizens who got together to fight the British. Well, sorry guys, but it doesn't say that. Try again. Kristin, 20
IA USA