Hmmmm? I do believe, and I have read the entire Constitution several times, according to the 10th all Federal gun statuates are unconstitutional as SCOTUS Justice Clarence Thomas has previously alluded to. Also someone should ask one of these anti's why that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, whose premises, language, and integrity rely heavily on the distinctions between State and People, would include powers of the State on a group of ammendments that was drafted to outline what the frameres exactlty meant by the terms "Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness"! Or, ask why would these terms be used interchangingly in the 2nd but no place else in either document! I mean imagine if we applied that reasoning to all the ammendments? Hell, only the gov't would have any power at all! Sound suspicious yet? The fact remains that all of the documented historical evidence illustrates vividly that the framers drafted the Bill of Rights in response to an uneasy populous that was not fully entrusting to the new federal gov't and they wanted "guarantees" that they could fall back upon if they percieved that the gov't was out of line. So the Bill of Rights was drafted, and it is the documented historical fact, that can be verified by any constitutional scholar, pro gun or not, that these 10 ammendments were intended to articulate the premise of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness to the individual citizen. The 10th and it's langugae only bolsters that fact. Think about it! If these rights or some rights were granted only to the states then why have an ammendemnet that outlines what the states authorities are on the ammendments? For the states to legistlate unto themselves in a never ending circle? Ludicrous! To reason that all the ammendemnts apply to the individual except for the only one that can secure the rest is a poor attempt at socialistic rule!
We the gun owners of this country are the insurance policy! Would you drive in a new BMW in downtown Manhatten in rush hour traffic without insurance? I wouldn't and that's just a car. The framers didn't wish to empower a gov't or people without insurance that if needed the same could be overthrown. Because of the fact, that since our inception we have been an armed populous, we are not and will not be enslaved, oppressed, or abused in any manner. If we were not armed we would long ago have died in civil war or have been conquered.
Much of the world envy's our greatness, stands in awe of our military might, our econimic influence, our advanced technology, and our colorful history but it is all drawn from the ideal that an armed populous can and will fight if nesseccary to ensure these principles of freedom from majority rule by popular election or totalatarian rule by oppression will be the deterent against such happenings. It is fundamental to understand that without US our country would be doomed.