[jmillikin]

The second amendment may have originally been intended to protect the population from the federal government, but subsequent advances in weapons technology and military tactics have rendered that protection completely ineffective. At the same time, these advances make it possible for even a single person to inflict incredible harm on a population, harm far beyond what the writers of the constitution could have imagined.

The argument therefore is that widespread possession of particularly dangerous weapons by the general population has no benefit and substantial drawbacks.

Nobody is seriously considering banning ownership of rifles, but it's worth discussing how more stringent requirements on training, registration, and storage could reduce the number of deaths by firearm.

[compee]

I honestly don't see any direct correlation with regards to what you are trying to say. Could you elaborate?

The only reason to have weapons (in a primitive sense) is for killing animals for food and for certain games related to specific types of weaponry (and wars, but why do we want those?). If some individuals feel the need to own a firearm of any kind to protect themselves (or to protect others from the dangerous people out there), then they should be able to buy the weaponry they feel they need/want to protect themselves and the people most important to them.

If it is understood in American culture that anyone around you may be carrying a gun at all times (or perhaps maybe not); it creates good behavior within society through induced paranoia toward people who have a mindset toward committing crimes.

[GiraffeNecktie]

Except that that's not at all true. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/pro-gun-myths-fa...

[compee]

Would you mind explicitly stating the flaw in my argument instead of directing me to some website? I can (and often do) read articles of this nature but with a title of "Pro Gun Myths" I'd rather cut out any potential bias and hear your direct argument.

[GiraffeNecktie]

You write "it creates good behavior within society through induced paranoia toward people who have a mindset toward committing crimes"

I pointed you to stats which showed that people who carry firearms become more belligerent themselves, more likely to escalate an argument (because they know they can defend themselves) more likely to kill themselves or members of their families etc.

Far from "creating good behavior", firearms do the reverse by encouraging people who are weak, unstable, angry, depressed or confused to act out.