Here are the things that baffle me:



- I see terms like "reasonable" applied to gun ownership. Rarely do I hear the same term applied to any other right enumerated in the constitution. The 1st amendment comes closest with yelling fire in a theater. But despite that, our government still funds porn in the name of "art", which is free speech. Not to mention the farce resulting from Citizens United. So, all in all, the 2nd Amendment is the only right that we are being brow beaten over not being "reasonable" with. I say that until people are asked to be reasonable with providing quarters to the military, it is asinine to expect any other inalienable right to be abrogated. Thats what the word "inalienable" means....it cannot be abrogated.



- Gun owners have been reasonable. Thats why I m not allowed to have that Howitzer that I want. And I can't mount a rocket to the top of my Jeep, either. Although I think it may give me a decided advantage when trying to merge into traffic. But with all the restrictions in place (many of which are not fully enforced, and have already been laid upon my neck like a yoke), the time for reason is over. Of course the NRA has a "hard line stance". Because after the erosion of the 2nd amendment got to where it is, they said "No more." You can't just forget about all the restrictions in place, and the road that got us here. Its not hard line when you are pushed and pushed and pushed, and keep giving, and then finally have had enough and just won't give one damned more inch. That is called "not being a push over". Instead, i believe that people wanting more restrictions should be more reasonable, and quit coming back to erode my inalienable right even further.