I agree witih pep. Also, the 2nd amendment was written so you could own a musket.
Times have changed. Technology has obviously changed. Time for the amendment to change.
I know none of this is funny, but my father declared last night that all babies born in the US should be issued a musket with a note from the President that says "If you can figure this out, you can keep it."
LOL! Then we decided if government wants everyone armed, we would like our own family drone. I added in a request for a Patriot missile. I mean, if you're going to do it, you might as well do it big.
Unfortunately abs, the Supreme Court doesn't agree with you and ruled some years ago that the 2nd Amendment allowed keeping guns for your personal protection. I don't believe they specified type and type of ammo though, so real gun regulation will likely involve that. Which unfortunately probably means no drone.
LOL! Go big or go home! Hahaha!
HSW - since I don't feel like grabbing the other quote - to answer your questions:
No, I do not think that having "trained" citizens is the same thing as having trained law enforcement and military personnel. Absolutely not the same thing at all. Law enforcement and military are trained in multiple scenarios and armed combat, to name just a few. The preparations the lay person receives does not make them qualified to handle these type of situations.
::head desk:: I just can't even get into a debate about the 2nd Amendment.
I'm going to jump in here with a few things...and once again, I do not own a gun, I don't want to own a gun, and they scare the crap out of me. HOWEVER...
1) In my opinion it is all or nothing. Either nobody has a gun or they are available for civilian population as well. This is primarily directed at those who think hunters should be able to own guns. You can bow hunt....I know several people who do. Giving anyone access to guns defeats the purpose of gun control as stated by several posters.
2) Even if it became illegal to own a gun, there would still be guns out there. Most likely it would be law abiding citizens who turn them in and criminal minded folks who would hang on to theirs. So, I guess I'm saying it is impossible to have absolutely no one, other than law enforcement, have a gun. So to take guns away from law abiding citizens, you are taking away their ability to defend themselves from the non-law abiding citizens.
3) Just because someone is in the military or in law enforcement doesn't mean they aren't capable of heinous acts. We hear about gun violence committed against family members by members of the military and law enforcement all the time on the news. I might be wrong, but I'm not so sure that a soldier returning from combat with PTSD is the best person to be carrying a gun.
Back to the original post. From the way Agrippa makes it sound, these women are leaving a gun unattended when children are nearby. If I was part of this playgroup, I would definitely find myself another one. It sounds to me like this is not a case of responsible gun ownership at. all.