What the United States Supreme Court Says

[Virulent]

I think the problem here is an inherent one in a written constitution which, like written scripture, ends up being seen as immutable.

The 2nd amendment is an amendment. I don't know how you can claim that the Constitution is treated as scripture; it has been amended dozens of times, as little as 16 years ago.

b) I am not aware of the Monarch of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth having any current plans to reinvade her lost colonies in the Americas.

Are you making a joke, or do you actually believe that the implicit right to revolution in American law exclusively refers to revolution against the United Kingdom?

The trouble with the right to bear arms is that criminals can also bear arms.

Wait; the problem with making gun ownership legal is people who don't care about legality?

...the criminals get bigger guns so the police have to get bigger guns and so the criminals get bigger guns and ad infinitum.

Guns don't work that way; small-caliber low-quality guns kill far more people than large-caliber high-quality ones. One of the most hilarious examples is the recent onerous restrictions against owning .50 caliber rifles; weapons that have never been used in civilian conflict.

"criminalize guns and only criminals will have them"

To get truly accurate aim (for the average person) the longer the barrel, the more accurate you will be. So having a pistol doesn't pass the logic test to me.

In the United States, the average distance at which a firefight occurs is 7 feet, according to the FBI. Range and accuracy are functionally irrelevant in civilian situations. What is important is that your weapon have great stopping power, that you be comfortable enough with it that you don't panic, and most importantly, it must be comfortable to carry... if you don't have it with you at all times, it is proportionately less useful.

Concealment of a weapon doesn't help you be protected, it just gives you a jump on the person trying to harm you.

Whats wrong with that?

Why, if denuseri is right, and you have the government you all want, are you so scared of it?

I don't know, Stalin's Russia, Mao's China, Hitler's Germany, Pol Pot's Cambodia, Thatcher's U.K.

I generally oppose government and law, period. I have no interest in supporting restrictions of any sort. War against the individual is inherent in all state power.