Quote:

I am a law-abiding Gun-owner and a proponent of the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution.



So, if one owns a gun and lives in a state in which it's against the law to own a gun, how can one still claim to be a 'law abiding' gun owner?

I support the second amendment myself as well as your right to peacefully assemble, but I also feel that the term 'arms' - as in the right to bear them - should be defined and updated from when it was written and intended to mean 'single shot muskets.' Had semi-automatic pistols and assault rifles been envisioned by our founding fathers, I'm pretty certain that they would have been a little more specific - and restrictive - in what they meant. The second amendment was also written when we had no standing army or federally funded militia or arsenal, and we had to rely on volunteer 'Minutemen' to bring their own arms if called upon for national defense. I'm pretty certain we've moved past that situation. In fact, the second amendment clearly states that the right to bear arms is specifically intended to 'maintain a well regulated militia' if I'm not mistooken. The 'militia' is now known as the National Guard. Are you a member? If you're concerned about home invasion, why not invest in a decent alarm system which alerts the police? MOST home invasions/burglaries happen when there is no one at home, anyway, so having a collection of guns in your house would have a statistically greater chance of being stolen (and thus adding to the crimanal arsenal) than serving to protect your home. That's pretty much why I don't have a firearm in my own house. (I DO have a couple pellet guns for pesky varmints, though...)

Other than that, I certainly support bare arms on good lookin' womenfolk, beer arms (I have a couple of those, myself), but I absolootely do NOT support arming bears. In particular, grizzlies, because these grumpy malcontents would not participate in any gun safety courses!

BTW, I predict that this thread will be getting locked PDQ...

JB "Long live the Duck Force!"