Prefacing their remarks with with that statement about a "well-regulated militia", many have wondered if they were talking about the right of the states to maintain armed forces, not the right of your local gangsta to own a military weapon. Still, it is not really clear what they meant when they wrote that, which is why I was requesting assistance from those who might be familiar with 18th century speech and usage. I respect the constitution and the founding fathers (note the lower case, patriots), but if you have to diagram the sentences and consult scholars to figure out what it says, then maybe it is just a little bit out of date.

I'm in favor of banning handguns and military-type firearms, as long as the last one to be turned in is mine. However, I also recognize that the practical problems of banning them make that likelihood impossible, no matter how desirable it may be,