Ironraven,

I think our differing viewpoints at times are a good thing. It would not be nearly as enlightening if we all shared the same opinion all the time. Our way stimulates thought better.

Samhain,

Having been on the streets in Iraq during rush hour or at the checkpoints, I don't have to imagine what it is like to consider anyone pulling up alongside as someone with his finger on the trigger ready to send both of us to see Allah. Let me assure you and the rest, it is most unsettling and frustrating, but still a reality. Yours is a good point made. As for the right to keep and bear vs being actually qualified to do so, I think I distinguished the difference and acknowledged both the comprehensive right of all law abiding citizens and the necessary desire that they be both willing and able to use the tool as intended. The Kenesaw GA example cited by UTAlumnus would support my position, in that the law both acknowledges the right and requires competency. There will always be "Conscientious Objectors" in every crowd, and the law ought to allow an exception for them to waive their rights at any time.

A responsibly free society will allow the law abiding citizen to exercise his right to defend himself and expect him to do so responsibly. To do otherwise is ultimately counter-productive for the individual and the society, and has always proven to be so. To attempt to disarm the general public is always an exercise in futility and ultimately leads to a social failure.

Unfortunately in Iraq, there are a lot of really irresponsible and immature gun owners who do foolish things. Then again, we have our gangs as well, don't we?