I know this hasn't escaped most of us here, but the ignorant attacks against our right are as similar as all other types of discrimination that are actively protected such as race discrimination.

You don't dare mention gun ownership in a job interview.  

Can't mention guns in schools.

Stereotyped as a redkneck (and not in a kind way), gang banger, thug, psycho, etc.

All this in spite of our right being a CONSTITUTIONAL right.  Then you have arguments about the "intent" of the framers to either mean malitia ownership, or no ownership of certain guns b/c they "never would have imagined it".  If you want to refer to their intent, doesn't appear to me they intended to end slavery, hence the amendment.

Problem is, it will take the RIGHT case before the SCOTUS to decide this issue.  Which is still a bit scary.  That person to challenge would have to be someone, probably, that owns an AR that has a scary feature during a ban.  But who wants to take that job on?

I'm not much of a Constitutional Law guy nor a discrimination person, so I'm sure someone else here could word/describe this frustration better.

I wish they would realize that the 2A was designed to give us the same weapons that the infantry has.  MG's, suppressors, grenades, etc.

"Out of the gun closet and into the streets!  We're here!.  We're Geared!  Get used to it!!!"

It's simple:  Some people take it too far and those are the ones held up as public examples.  Look at Islam for Allah's sake!  The radicals are only a small percentage of the Muslim population but they get all the press because it fits a particular agenda, and all I read on here is "ROPEer this and ROPer that" and I think that we Americans are a pretty hateful and fearful bunch.  We fought wars against just this kind of scapegoating and have now become victims of it ourselves.

All you have to do is cruise gun message boards and even I have at times thought "wow, what a redneck" or "that guy is a psycho."  I've come to realize that there are normal gun owners and shooters and then there are "gun fetishists," which is an overused term, but there is much truth in the unhealthy, obsessive attraction that some people have to weapons.  

Also, at one gun club I used to belong to, I noticed that most people who came with AKs and so forth never actually set up any targets, but just blasted large amounts of ammunition into the dirt berms.  In fact, seeing someone else there with a target was unusual.  So there you go--the label often fits.

That Cho guy, if not a member of this board, almost definitely visited this site.  None of his ideas were original in any way--they were all derived from pop culture and Internet discussion boards like this one.  He probably even got advice on weapon and ammunition selection from people like us (although maybe not since he didn't buy any 33 round mags for that Glock--maybe none were available?  He definitely followed the "get both" mantra).  It's not the Internet's fault that someone misused information that is widely available.  However, the picture that outsiders see is quite ugly.

By the way, in Swahili, "cho" means toilet.  Go figure.

Quoted: It's simple:  Some people take it too far and those are the ones held up as public examples.  Look at Islam for Allah's sake!  The radicals are only a small percentage of the Muslim population but they get all the press because it fits a particular agenda, and all I read on here is "ROPEer this and ROPer that" and I think that we Americans are a pretty hateful and fearful bunch.  We fought wars against just this kind of scapegoating and have now become victims of it ourselves. All you have to do is cruise gun message boards and even I have at times thought "wow, what a redneck" or "that guy is a psycho."  I've come to realize that there are normal gun owners and shooters and then there are "gun fetishists," which is an overused term, but there is much truth in the unhealthy, obsessive attraction that some people have to weapons.   Also, at one gun club I used to belong to, I noticed that most people who came with AKs and so forth never actually set up any targets, but just blasted large amounts of ammunition into the dirt berms.  In fact, seeing someone else there with a target was unusual.  So there you go--the label often fits. That Cho guy, if not a member of this board, almost definitely visited this site.  None of his ideas were original in any way--they were all derived from pop culture and Internet discussion boards like this one.  He probably even got advice on weapon and ammunition selection from people like us (although maybe not since he didn't buy any 33 round mags for that Glock--maybe none were available?  He definitely followed the "get both" mantra).  It's not the Internet's fault that someone misused information that is widely available.  However, the picture that outsiders see is quite ugly. By the way, in Swahili, "cho" means toilet.  Go figure.

Huh? We Americans are a generous and incredibly tolerant bunch. Sure, there are many places along the "generous and tolerant" continuum, but the popular media exists solely on the extreme fringes of this group. The extreme examples of any issue are what gets reported, when the great bulk of the population falls actually somewhere in the middle.

When I worked a quarter mile from the Pentagon, I'd see and pass and do business with women dressed in the Hijab EVERY DAY - and no one said 'boo' to them about them being Muslim.

By and large Americans are a very generous, live and let live people - when there's a disaster anywhere on the planet our first reaction is NOT to pour into the streets and start burning flags and chanting "death to Pakistan" or "serves them right" when an earthquake levels cities and homes.

No. We instead immediately start making donations and sending relief supplies to those people - even if it's the city of Bam in Iran, or starving North Koreans, or irradiated Russians in Ukraine.

And as for 'racist white america' when something tragic happens in the ghetto, who'se arriving on the scene with blankets, free food, and offers of shelter? Just black or hispanic charities? No, big main-line majority white charities, churches, individuals, etc.

As a general rule Americans tend to be far more accepting to other groups than most peoples on earth are to their minorities. BUT if a minority starts swaggering around, making it a point to "dis" the majority how can we be surprised that EVENTUALLY the wells of good will run dry?

Quoted: I wish they would realize that the 2A was designed to give us the same weapons that the infantry has.  MG's, suppressors, grenades, etc.

I agree, however, I could be happy with a start of recognizing the basic right, then we could move up the "banning chain"