I know perfectly well, and still a normal person has no business brandishing a sig sauer in normal day to day life.

Also, if you're going to argue that you need weapons to protect yourself, then clearly you're also saying that you live in such dangerous places that life itself is not possible without guns - which just…

And nobody should, I believe that owning a gun is in most states far too easy a thing and that an average person has no business owning one. If you're worried about your safety, don't live in dangerous neighborhoods or cities. Get a lock. A guard dog. There are people living in major capitals of the world who never…

It is not, because these were smart guys and if they saw that morons were still reading their text as an excuse to play 80's action heroes, they'd just shut down the country and try and start over somewhere smarter.

We have amended, debated, changed, added and controlled the other amendments. The entire constitution has been modified to suit the modern world - EXCEPT FOR THE 2ND AMENDMENT which people keep clinging on to in this crazy, pointless and juvenile belief that if Da Man comes for them, they'll totally be safe.

The constitution was a continuation of the declaration of independence - which itself was a declaration of war. Course the founding fathers believed that anyone was in a militia then. You can't apply things from nearly two hundred years ago and pretend that they can still be directly applied to the world today. No gun…

And hey, what do you know, guns are also drastically different, why aren't we reading that into the constitution then? When the founding fathers wrote what they did, I don't any of them was imagining the dumbest person in their town being able to walk around with a weapon concealed in their pants that packed more…

False.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

It's all one sentence. Meaning the people of a well regulated (trained, disciplined) militia, for the security of the free state, shall have the right bear arms.

Explain why no mass shooter has attempted his act somewhere where armed citizens (not victims) are likely to oppose him?

There isn't a shred of proof? Huh, then that must be completely irrelevant that there are audio surveillance tapes of Davidian telling his men to pour the gas, the massive amounts of gas canisters that they had and the fact that the cult had stated they were getting ready for death. If anything, there is overwhelming…

In a free country, you have the right to justify your right to own a deadly weapon, just as everyone else has a right to point out that there's no rational reason to own one, there's nothing to protect that right (you are not a member of the militia, so don't go waving the constitution card) and the whole "I can do…

Your constitution states that a militia has a right for them. You people keep blindly repeating the constitution as a holy book, yet most of you can't seem to get it right what it says in there.

The fire they started themselves. And that thing didn't come out of thin air, the leader of the cult himself had stated to keeping child brides, telling people he was entitled to 70 wives or some crap like that.

Stop bringing the constitution in this if you have absolutely no idea what you're citing. The constitution speaks of a well controlled militia. Two guys in a pick up truck is not fitting to that definition.

For someone who claims to have done a number of things exactly suitable for this argument, you seem to have missed lessons in reading comprehension. What other explanation is there for you skipping entirely the part where I stated:

Were they not exhuming bodies illegally? Were they not in possession of a stockpile of illegal weapons? Did they not open fire on two occasions on the police? Did they not set themselves on fire, after expressing on a number of times the intent to commit mass suicide?

I remind you the Waco Siege was sparked over an attempt to disarm an otherwise peaceful religious sect,

Oh christ, I've actually heard some of these people. Some folks even on these commenting boards have consistently stated that had they been at Aurora, they would have put a stop to the situation with their Dirty Harry skillz. It's such a demented and twisted view of reality that it hurts.

I never suggested banning anything. But I do think that a normal person has no reason to own those weapons to keep at their home. Shooting at a gun range? Great. Rent the gun. Buy a locker from there to keep it there. The kind of arsenal that the mother and son Lansas owned? Completely ridiculous.

A normal person has absolutely no reason to own semi-auto or modded automatic weapons. If you're a hunter, great, but that deer doesn't need sixty bullets shot within ten seconds to be put down. Don't say protection either, because that just insinuates that you keep an armada of loaded weapons ready at all times in…

I've seen the worst of it, but also the best of it. If you look for it, you can find awesome farmers markets and mom & pop stores that sell incredible natural meat without the excessive additives and salt. It's that kind of a disconnect that can get really infurating. America, at it's best, is like no other place on…