How Guns Are Like Nukes

Illinois registers gun owners,yet Chicago is the murder capital of the US.

OTOH,DC used to have similar murder rates,but after SCOTUS invalidated DC's gun ban,the murder rate plummeted. "More guns,less crime", but the guns were in the hands of lawful citizens.

There are reasonable restrictions on the First Amendment. You can't claim First Amendment protection for treason, fraud, extortion, etc. I can't yell political slogans with a bullhorn through your bedroomn window at 2 a.m. in the morning. There are thousands of other examples from the classic examle of yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater to terroristic threats on an airline flight.

The type of firearms appropriate for citizens would be those of the type in common use. It also depends on the citizen. Dynamite is appropriate for a mining engineer but inappropriate for a New York City cab driver. A machine gun may be appropriate for an isolated rancher in an area subject to border raids, but inappropriate for a theater usher.

Perhaps I'm wrong but you seemed to have missed the 'responsible owner' part of this conversation and I disagree with your stance on both the first and second amendment here, you clearly have the right to yell political slogans through a bullhorn at 2 a.m. outside my window, it's irresponsible though, and I, would have the right to shoot you between the eyes as a result, invasion of property and privacy being my reasoning. Secondly the idea that a rancher in an isolated border area as opposed to a New York cabbie is ridiculous, it isn't about the area they live, the second amendment was written to give the people the right to defend against a tyrannical government, I might carry a pistol for protection in a city enviroment, cont.

But I absolutely demand the right to possess a weapon at least equal to that of a soldier of the government to use if I absolutely have too, and I would be 'well regulated' enough to know when, where and how to use said weapon.

you're not rational.
a noise disturbance is not any lethal threat,so you have ZERO right to shoot the person making the noise. So much for your idea of "responsible".

Thank you for demonstrating the point that there are mentally unhinged people like yourself who (like children and felons) should not be allowed to possess firearms.

How is that not rational? And how does it constitute being unhinged? It's 2 in the morning, you start blaring political statements in my window through a bullhorn, whose irrational and unhinged here? I'm sorry but it's perfectly normal to become seriously alarmed when mentally unhinged moron armed with the freedom of speech, a bullhorn but no rational sense of responsiblity to NOT use it a 2 in the morning comes calling, yes, I'm going to shoot you, talk about children, tacitus and jay, you both qualify in my book for your irrational responses to me. Again, you both miss the responsible part of the argument, or did not my use of the term 'well regulated' (see responsible) make it clear to you?

And you both also seemed to have breezed by the stated purpose of the 2nd amendment, it's not merely about self defense, anymore than it is about hunting or sports shooting. I'll repeat again, hopefully you'll be listening with both eyes this time, IT'S TO KEEP IN CHECK AN OUT OF CONTROL TYRANNICAL GOVERNMENT. Savvy?