Guns/gun ownership (relevant only for USA'ers)

Again, sure it doesn't have civilian use, okay. How about militia use.

The problem with that is, how do we define what is a "militia" and what is a "gang"? A bunch of KKK guys could get together and call themselves a militia; would anybody really want them to have rocket launchers?

"The militia is a voluntary force not associated or
under the control of the States except when
called out; [when called into actual service] a
permanent or long standing force would
be entirely different in make-up and call."
Also:
"The President, and government, will only control
the militia when a part of them is in the actual
service of the federal government, else, they are
independent and not under the command of the
president or the government. The states would
control the militia, only when called out into the
service of the state, and then the governor would
be commander in chief where enumerated
in the respective state constitution."

If the militia is to protect a state from tyranny, then it would behove the milita to make sure it had a rocket launcher in order to fend of the ferderal governments army from moving in on a state. The milita is allowed so that when the government goes crazy and does a bunch of things that make people feel threatened, then it is the job of the milita to protect the people and the the state.

You can see a militia as being a group of regular citizens who fight back if/when the government decides to stick a rod up everyone's ass. The trouble with that is, can't any group of people call themselves a militia? What if pro-life people decided that abortion being legal was a case of the government going too far? They could form a sort of militia, with the intent of taking the rights of unborn babies back from the government. (That's how they might see it.)

In such a case, a group of citizens would be standing up for what they see as basic human rights, fighting a government they see as tyrannical. They'd be a militia. But I certainly wouldn't want ardent pro-lifers to be able to arm themselves with rocket launchers.

You can see a militia as being a group of regular citizens who fight back if/when the government decides to stick a rod up everyone's ass. The trouble with that is, can't any group of people call themselves a militia? What if pro-life people decided that abortion being legal was a case of the government going too far? They could form a sort of militia, with the intent of taking the rights of unborn babies back from the government. (That's how they might see it.)

In such a case, a group of citizens would be standing up for what they see as basic human rights, fighting a government they see as tyrannical. They'd be a militia. But I certainly wouldn't want ardent pro-lifers to be able to arm themselves with rocket launchers.

The founding fathers didn't have the milita in mind to protect the government. It gave people the right to form milita's so that they could protect themselves their community, their laws, their own property. Not that of the USA governments. So in theory, yes the crazies can form their own milita to fight if they felt the federal government was going to far with its laws. That is why it is their in the constituion, to ensure that people can live the way they want.

In a wider view, it sorta boils to state vs. federal rights.

Instead of the actual state government, it is the very people themselves forming an army to protect themselves against the government.

And the Beretta 93R. Don't forget the sickest handgun ever made.

Dragunov SVD still there along with the Barret M82, a G36, Colt M4A1, and just for shits and giggles a Milkor MGL Mk.1

If we're talkin sickest hand gun it's gotta be the M1911, big freakin bullet and a whole lotta fun.

So, I was thinking;
Now personally, I love guns. If I could I'd love to have a Sig P220, Stetchkin APS, one each of the M-16 and P-90 as well as a Dragunov SVD and a Barret M82.

But, I dislike how easy it is to acquire illegal guns. There is no follow-through with second-hand gun sales; you can sell your gun to any gangbanger on the street or random whackjob at a gunshow.

My idea is to have handgun owners subject to random ATF inspections to make sure they still are in possession of a firearm, and any sale of personally owned handguns must be recorded and subject to the same rules as dealer-citizen transactions. No restrictions imposed on gun owners, they must simply be prepared to, at any time, to prove they still possess the gun they bought.

I posed this idea as a youtube comment on the video of William Shatner shooting a black guy three times and remarking "Thank God for guns" (yes, I know it's from Boston Legal) and got a reply stating to the effect that my idea to cut down on illeigal guns was bunk because the second amendment was to serve as the last line of defense against a tyrannical government.

Well...that argument holds no water at all. Police/military hardware is so much beyond what a citizen can possess, seems like that possibility is already gone.

What do you all think?

also, a dragunov????? c'mon man, you can get a better rifle than that at wal-mart. you do realize it is an AK modified with a long barrel,better butt-stock, sniper scope, and beefy firing chamber (so it can fire high powered ammo). get you a springfield M1A (any variety) or Benelli R1, or hell, any AR body rifle with a 22 or 24 inch barrel with good optics is a better gun.

it is none of their business what the hell i do with my guns

See, that scares the hell out of me. Not necessarily because you said it, but because anybody could say it. A crazy guy who thinks Jesus lives in his cereal bowl and Hitler lives in his cabinet could say it. Isn't that unnerving?

The only reason why a politician wants you to hand over your firearm or restrict your access to them is because he/she wants a state where you can't resist the government (i.e. them).