I agree with David here. Once again, people are commenting without knowing the full extent of the situation. And the excessive name calling in these comments is, at best, childish. I believe as the ACLU does. Furthermore, I don’t see the reason as to why someone needs an AK-47 or a pistol. I would have absolutely no problem with someone owning a rifle for hunting or a shotgun, a handgun is useless in this case unless hunting a human, which is not my style. The 2nd amendment is widely misunderstood, it protects militias, not an individual’s right. All you need is a little American History lesson to realize why this amendment was enacted. It was not enacted so that some little old lady could shoot an African American man who is across the street because she feels threatend but rather to protect our democracy by holding a revolution against our own govt. if necessary. All of those that agree completely with the ACLU except for this decision and are not renewing their memberships should really consider all of the things that the ACLU does. After all, they do occupy almost a third of the Supreme Court’s time in order to defend us. And to paraphrase Anthony Romero, the NRA has one amendment to protect, the ACLU has all the rest. So cut them some slack if you disagree with one mere decision.
Always a supporter,
Lucia