Reply #38: At the risk of stating the obvious

[Still Sensible]

the issue isn't whether or not the government "of the people" should regulate or restrict the "right to bear arms," but rather where the line is drawn between acceptable and unacceptable arms that can be owned. Obviously, individuals are not allowed to own bazookas or gatling guns or Uzis or rocket propelled grenade launchers, but all of these are considered "arms."

Generally speaking, but not universally accepted, liberals and progressives would like to see that line drawn in a more restrictive way than conservatives. Every attempt to place any further restrictions on the right of individuals to own weapons is vigorously opposed by the well organized, fully funded NRA. They oppose any and all attempts to restrict, register and/or control availability of weaponry.

All of this notwithstanding, I don't believe that it is politically feasible to pursue further restrictive legislation at this time. Personally, I would appreciate the NRA and their attempts to protect second amendment rights more if they were open to some common sense (in my opinion) legislation, particularly with regard to registration and gun purchasing. But they oppose every measure, regardless.

JMHO.