Our militias could definitely stand to be regulated better

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

59. I addressed the meaning of the 2A in light of...

...a contemporaneous law which expressed that ALL free and independent persons were part of the militia and, as such, assumed to be owners of the regular accoutre ma of the army and organized militia. Suggesting that the law has changed does nothing in the way of interpreting the Founder's intentions nor the common understanding of the phraseology used in the day the amendment was written.

It is also my contention that any restriction of the common ability of an individual to provide for his/her own personal defense and for that of his/her family, impairs the fundamental right to life expressed in the Declaration of Independence as a reason for the country's founding.

I'm not arguing for the freedom to own an armed Ohio class sub. I'm not arguing for the freedom to own an M-2 belt fed .50 cal machine gun. Personal small arms are used day-to-day by law enforcement and private citizens alike for self-defense. A right to life IS a right to self-defense and small arms are a common means.

While some gun owners have training and are or at least attempt to be responsible, most are not. Anyone can buy a firearm without any training at all.

Can you somehow justify that most gun owners are either untrained, irresponsible or both? That is my inference from what you said.