If everyone who owns a gun were responsible, it would be a better world.  The foolish mom in Conn. who brought her weird son to the range and failed to properly secure her weapons from him is a prime example why many of us do not like automatic weapons in the hands of the public.  And since our country is always at war, we have already given up our inalienable rights to life.  Our right to Liberty is a sham, with state governments allowing private corporations to run prisons etc.

And it should be noted that some mass murders use knives and/or machetes.  But the right to bear arms, is enumerated as the right to bear arms, as part of a well organized militia.  Most weapons were maintained in the community armory -visit colonial Williamsburg for a historical example.

Were has our right to protect ourselves been broken, are there still states that punish you for protecting your own (English law) castle to include your car?  Clearly the police feel they can break into your house or car when they want, if you are to believe the news, or t.v.

Clearly, given the latest police planting evidence videos, we should be allowed to have a lawyer accompany any police search of our domiciles or auto..and what a mess that would be.  All of which should require warrants signed off on by judges.

Is that enough butane for the day?

Well, I am confused.  There is always competition, which can lead to anger and lashing out.   Especially if It is for basic life supporting stuff like housing and food., and yes, medical care.

Besides anger, there are always affairs and some of them lead to the desire to eliminate a present other.  We need guns, to protect ourselves from the wild, animal and human, and the greedy.  

What I do  NOT understand is the leap to victims and absolved responsibility to self.   What ship just landed on your shores???

If it was a US Destroyer, do not get mad, they apparently can't avoid getting hit.

Yeah, I am not sure either what he is trying to say.
Perhaps the definition of victim, is subjective, to him????
Let me put it in this context perhaps....

Being of able body, and mind, yet instead of providing for self, choose to let others meet your needs.
The reasons for doing so can vary greatly, however, the self worth one acquires in doing their best to achieve their own needs, will always escape those who relinquish control of their lives to others.

In fact, I would say they sold themselves out, too cheaply, and those doing the purchasing, know it, and capitalized upon it.

Those Sporting Guns are useful for defense. That they are used for sport doesn't mean people don't have a right to the tools of self defense.

Did you guys miss this one?

http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1501900138

Automatic weapons are for killing humans.  Ain't no other reason for their being.  (Well, vampire hunters shooting down a cloud of bats might be the exception)

Yes, firing them is fun, but it is not why they were built.  The M-60 is more fun than the M-16; and watching the tracer rounds hone in on the target as it is getting chewed to pieces is neat.  The question is, should everyday citizens have them .

The Constitution says we, da people, have the right, in a well regulated militia, to have access to them.  Should they be in homes where children, upset spouses, and angry white/black/brown/red/purple men could get easy access, I rather hope not.  BUT, if you feel the need to overthrow the government, well  maybe.

The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

That is a statement.
Using your expertise in the English language, explain how it's possible for the first part of the text to in any way limit or contradict the above statement .

Yeah, me neither.