"If guns were to have stricter laws and become more regulated, people would still find ways to get them illegally." Yes, this is true, however this happens NOW. If there were striker regulations who could even get the guns in the first place, there would be less guns around. There are people now who shouldn't own guns, with striker regulations these people will not be able to own and guns and therefore, theoretically, sell these guns to people who do not have license for them. People are not asking for guns to be taken away completely, to discuss your "If we have no way to defend our rights, what's stopping corrupt politicians from taking them?" people are simply asking for there to be tighter restrictions on the people who should be able to, to have deeper background checks, and for there to be check ins like with your driver license every so years.

Fear is not normally associated with guns in America. It normally is associated strongly with "freedom." Yet this is the older generations ideals on how they can "truly" become free. The upcoming generations have only seen guns as something that can very easily take away lives, therefore associating it with fear. Not asking for guns owners to turn over their guns to be melted down into cars, but just asking for regulations on guns--who can own them, deep background checks, repeating license checks--is very reasonable to just be able to control the death and the fear guns cause.

Yes, the constitution may say that people do have the "RIGHT" to bear arms, however it never says that the federal government cannot step in and regulate your rights. There are many examples of the federalist government we live in that does just this. Just like yes, the states can say that people can grown and own marijuana legally, the federal government puts laws and restrictions on the rights the states give the people. There is a growing danger in our country regarding guns, more and more people die at the hands of guns. The tighter the restrictions the government can give to gun owners, the safer our country can become. If you are a legal gun owner, why are you so worried about the restrictions that may come?

"If citizens with drivers licenses routinely have to renew their's to prove they are still capable of driving a vehicle, (you know, something that can potentially endanger their's or someone else's life) then why can't the same be done with guns? If someone is unstable or unfit to handle a firearm, simply do not trust them with such. It is not violating their rights, but rather protecting them and others." This point is something most people do not even think of. People go through things that can change them as a person completely. With these changes can come new ideals, new actions, and new personality traits. People should have to do a check in every couple years or so just like with their drivers license. People who are not fit to own a firearm should not be able to just have one because they have enough money to get one and are over the age of 18. There should be restrictions such as going to get a renewal on your firearms if the people have restrictions on driving.

You make the point that women should understand the consequences of their actions after having sex and being impregnated. You do understand that contraceptives do not ALWAYS work? Even if a woman is regularly taking her birth control, there are factors to make the pill not work. If a woman is taking antibiotics while on birth control,she can get pregnant. Condoms do not always work. Even if both parties are taking the steps to prevent pregnancy, there are still ways the woman can get pregnant BY ACCIDENT. Furthermore, not every contraceptive is 100% preventive. There are instances where it just doesn't work. If men and women are taking the steps to prevent their "consequences" then they shouldn't be forced to have the child they were trying to prevent from being conceived.

You make a good point about the financial abilities for not only a child but for doctor visits. Some people can't afford to get the help they need from doctors, like you said, putting the child at risk. Financial support is one of the biggest things children need to develop, without this a child's life won't be as prosperous as it needs to be. Money is a big factor that goes into abortion. It's cheaper to have an abortion than to deal with months worth of doctor visits and then 18 years of paying for another human being.

Abortion in all states should be legal up to the end of the second trimester. Up to the third trimester, women should be allowed to get an abortion if wanted. If the woman cannot afford the child, if the child is not wanted, or the woman was sexually assaulted, they would have the entire first and second trimester to decide what she wants to do. It is the woman's right and choice what she wants to do with her body, therefore she should be allowed to have an abortion is she wants. It's her privacy right. The first trimester ends after 12 weeks, most women can't even find out that they're pregnant to a minimum of 2 weeks after their menstruation. Unwanted children end up in the foster care system which is not doing what they need for children. Abortion is a way for women to keep their lives if they decide a child is not what they need and should be legal in all states.