This debate promises to shed more heat than light. The Second Amendment has been misinterpreted. It has to do with the right of a militia to arm when invaded by a foreign country. It doesn't necessarilly permit every citizen to own hand guns or automatic weapons.

The notion that only outlaws will have guns is true if you find that they get their guns by stealing them from "honest" folk. Hence, the more private government, gun ownership, the more they will wind up in the hands of outlaws.

There is a prevalent distrust of the police, these days. I wonder what would happen if there weren't any policeman? Who would be safe?

The "government" is an amorphous enemy these days to many who feel their rights are trampled on. And yet, without this government would anyone have any rights at all?

And what is this "government" anyhow? Are they elected representatives by the people? Doesn't that make the people accountable for the actions of the government?

This anti-government talk is usually the rhetoric of those who claim states rights over federal decrees. But State governments are governments also. Assuming that governments are inherently corrupt, would you rather have 50 corrupt local governments or one central one?

As it is seen, today, in the U.S., gun ownership as a protection is perfectly worthless in extirpating Naziism. Many American Nazis have guns. Who are the outlaws? Is the local right-wing militia your best friend?

Just asking questions, here, because I don't have answers.

Frank