ลองตอบคำถามทางการเมือง

0 ตอบ

 @ISIDEWITHถาม…5 มอส5MO

ลองนึกย้อนกลับไปถึงช่วงเวลาที่คุณหรือคนที่คุณรู้จักได้รับผลกระทบจากความรุนแรงของปืน - มุมมองของคุณเกี่ยวกับการควบคุมอาวุธปืนส่งผลต่อมุมมองของคุณอย่างไร

 @ISIDEWITHถาม…5 มอส5MO

คุณคิดว่าการให้ความรู้และการฝึกอบรมเกี่ยวกับปืนในปัจจุบันเพียงพอหรือไม่ และพวกเขามีบทบาทอย่างไรในเหตุการณ์ที่เกี่ยวข้องกับปืน

 @ISIDEWITHถาม…5 มอส5MO

การเปลี่ยนแปลงกฎหมายอาวุธปืนอาจส่งผลกระทบต่อชุมชนแตกต่างกันอย่างไรโดยขึ้นอยู่กับลักษณะทางเศรษฐกิจและสังคมหรือทางภูมิศาสตร์

 @ISIDEWITHถาม…5 มอส5MO

คุณคิดอย่างไรเกี่ยวกับความสำคัญทางวัฒนธรรมของปืนในสังคมอเมริกันและผลกระทบต่อกฎหมายปืน

 @ISIDEWITHถาม…5 มอส5MO

คุณจะเสนอให้สร้างสมดุลระหว่างสิทธิในการแก้ไขรัฐธรรมนูญฉบับที่สองโดยมีเป้าหมายเพื่อลดการเสียชีวิตจากปืน โดยเฉพาะการฆ่าตัวตายอย่างไร

 @ISIDEWITHถาม…5 มอส5MO

คุณมีความคิดเห็นอย่างไรเกี่ยวกับการใช้อาวุธปืนเพื่อการป้องกันตัวเองเทียบกับความเสี่ยงที่อาจเกิดขึ้นต่อชุมชน

 @ISIDEWITHถาม…5 มอส5MO

คุณคิดว่าความสัมพันธ์ระหว่างสุขภาพจิตและการเข้าถึงอาวุธปืนควรได้รับการแก้ไขอย่างไรในกฎหมายเกี่ยวกับปืน

 @ISIDEWITHถาม…5 มอส5MO

คุณสามารถแบ่งปันเรื่องราวหรืออารมณ์ที่รวบรวมมุมมองของคุณว่ากฎหมายปืนที่เข้มงวดยิ่งขึ้นจะทำให้คุณรู้สึกปลอดภัยมากขึ้นหรือน้อยลงหรือไม่

 @ISIDEWITHถาม…5 มอส5MO

คุณคิดว่าการมีอาวุธปืนเปลี่ยนแปลงพลวัตภายในสถานที่ทั่วไป เช่น โรงเรียน โบสถ์ หรือบาร์ ในทางใดบ้าง

 @ISIDEWITHถาม…5 มอส5MO

ประสบการณ์ส่วนตัวเกี่ยวกับความปลอดภัยหรือการขาดประสบการณ์อาจส่งผลต่อจุดยืนของการเป็นเจ้าของปืนของใครบางคนได้อย่างไร

 @2HWR376จาก Ohio ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

Gun control is simple: keep them out of the hands of convicted felons and the mentally ill. Banning guns from public use entirely puts them in the hands of the government, which is a dangerous and frightening situation. The mentally ill should not be allowed to possess a gun, no matter how much progress they have made through therapy and/or medication, due to the potential of relapse. Convicted felons should not allowed guns for obvious reasons, as they could potentially commit more crimes. "Stand Your Ground" laws, in principle, are good, but can be used for the wrong purpose.

 @2HWKZK3จาก New York ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

what gives someone the right to control what another holds? who has a right to say do not touch that plant, rock, metal, chemical, on their own land. but in public areas this is reasonable. transportation between places should be as free as possible so long as no crimes using the guns are committed.

 @2HW7TN9จาก Florida ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

No, only for mental health patients who are considered dangerous and not your typical mother who happens to take Paxil! Convicted felons fall under a laws that were created a century ago when $500.00 was considered a lot of money. They have constitutional rights just like anyone else and should not be tried again daily once they have paid their debt to society!

 @2HTVWGGจาก Michigan ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

I'd like to shoot the person in the leg who included this question. I think the government should actually intervene on this one. Normally I don't want the government to assist but this time? Yes.

The government should GIVE every american a hand gun and a rifle upon their 21st birthday as long as the person is willing to take gun safety classes and demonstrates no past history of mental illness.

Free guns for all americans.

 @2HT9HPWจาก Wisconsin ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

Yes, because as the 2nd amendment states, guns are for a well regulated militia ready to take up arms against a threat to the country. Most people do not meet this qualifications, and we already have this in the form of police and the army.

 @2HSC4B7จาก North Carolina ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

Abolish military grade weaponry outside of active U.S. combat personnel (including assault weapons). Don't ban guns period from public use (doing so I think is unconstitutional); local militias not on federal watch lists should be unhindered by federal and state law enforcement. Annual psychological testing and check-up training must be mandatory.

 @2HS4SSNจาก California ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

 @2HRLNY9จาก Wisconsin ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

I think that there should be a constitutional amendment that gives Congress more flexibility when it comes to gun control legislation. The weapons during the time of the Founders and the weapons of today are very different. I suspect they would have chosen their wording differently had they envisioned the weaponry we have today.

Also, I think gun control laws should primarily be handled at the state or local level. Owning a powerful rifle may make sense on a ranch in a Western state, but probably not a good idea to be tagging one along in the middle of a heavily populated urban area.

 @2HMX9TSรีพับลิกันจาก Connecticut ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

Yes, but banning individuals with "mental health issues" specifically from owning guns increases the stigma around these illnesses; we need to limit the sale and use of firearms for everyone and stop conflating mental issues with gun violence.

 @2HH8HKYจาก Illinois ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

I feel gun control is largely a measure by which to protect mostly white upper-middle class citizens from what they feel to be lower-class, minority-driven disorder. I do not underestimate the danger of gun violence at schools and other public places (such as theaters). But I feel these incidents reflect less a problem with guns and more a problem with mental health and the poor quality of mental healthcare in this country. Gun violence is incidental to that. Spending on healthcare should be the priority, not necessarily greater gun restrictions. I do support strict surveillance and controls…  อ่านเพิ่มเติม

 @2H9G9S9จาก Kentucky ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

Most people with guns will let their 3 year olds shoot them in Kentucky and that is not safe at all.
Plus people don't really need to hunt these days to survive. Animals are going endangered because of a sport. If someone needs to hunt in order to live they need to get someone to check their location and if they are isolated from any markets etc then they can hunt and use a gun. Other wise no.

 @2GW2TJGสังคมนิยมจาก Missouri ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

We have a tremendous gun control problem in this country but more than that we have a huge mental health problem in this country. The availability of guns to children and the mentally unstable is ludicrous. Though I would prefer an existence in which guns do not exist, PERIOD. I feel certain that if they were banned entirely only criminals would have guns. Take into consideration The attack on Charlie in Paris in January 2015, Mohammad Mehra in Toulousse and the attack on the Jewish school and Anders Breviak and the death of 79 people, mostly children, in Norway.

 @2GTLMQ8เสรีนิยมจาก Mississippi ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

No, and eliminate all laws, federal, state and municipal restricting the ownership and carrying of weapons. Any convictions resulting from non-violent and non-negligent gun association should be vacated, and any public official advocating for gun control should be censured, and eligible for impeachment for infringing on the constitutional rights of their constituents.
There is absolutely no legitimate or honest interest in government regulation or restriction of the right for citizens to defend themselves, their families, and their property by any means that they wish.

 @2GT9ZL8เสรีนิยมจาก Texas ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

I don't support increased gun control, but developing a more intensive screening process to hopefully limit those who really shouldn't have their hands on a weapon could be helpful. Yes, it'd make things more tedious, but law abiding citizens who want to keep their rights will go through with the thorough screening and training. Even if guns become outlawed, there will still be those who do not follow the law and what are their would be victims supposed to do? The police and designated individuals who have permits can't be everywhere at once and innocent blood will be shed either way.

 @2GMSCWYจาก Pennsylvania ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

How many more Sandy Hooks do we need before we ban all guns. No one needs to hunt--grocery stores have enough for everyone. People should be forced to cities form the rural areas where the animals should be allowed to live unmolested. Federal game officers can manage dangerous animals that wander into the city.

 @2GMS4LFจาก Alabama ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

No, and repeal the National Firearms Act of 1934, the Federal Firearms Act of 1938, the Gun Control Act of 1968 and any other acts; the country did just fine following the Constitution prior to those Acts and they have caused more problems than they have solved.

 @N9X7T3 จาก Texas ตอบแล้ว…4ปี4Y

Cars kill more people AND can kill more people maliciously than guns. We make you get a license to get a car. Put some educational requirements and educate EVERY american on guns to take the "video game" nature out of the deadly tool. Be a parent, don't make the government do your job, lazy ***

หมั้น

กิจกรรมในอดีตของผู้ใช้ที่มีส่วนร่วมกับ question นี้

กำลังโหลดข้อมูล...

กำลังโหลดแผนภูมิ... 

Demographics

กำลังโหลดหัวข้อทางการเมืองของผู้ใช้ที่เกี่ยวข้องกับการสนทนานี้

กำลังโหลดข้อมูล...