Well worth a click.
We are now doing a replay of the Civil War, same as Europe is doing a replay of WWII -- the fronts have broken and moved, the sides are scrambled, but many of the same underlying fissures are once again visible. Ours are urban/rural, white/black, centralized/decentralized, past/various futures, and more. Europe's are not all that different when it comes to centralization of power, when you think about it. They even have their own race elements, though without our specific history of slavery. And on the whole, with the exception of some lunatic in Norway who found himself without allies (or maybe without an axis), they aren't as focused on guns.
Nobody's answered my question about "what action by the government would cause you to respond by using guns, and what's the overall strategy?" by the way. Maybe nobody wants to go on record as a seditionist, finding innuendo more comfortable. I'd like to see what the NRA's Jim Porter (see link) would say about it.
He looks (and likely talks) exactly like my grandfather, who was cut out of the same piece of cloth and born in 1875 in the south, ten years after the end of the Civil War. Our family has long generations. My grandfather never got over it and raised his son to be an excellent pistol marksman -- I've still got his military medal someplace. I see more than a century later lots of other people haven't gotten over it either, and are still working on their marksmanship. Kind of gives me the shivers, in a ghosty way.
"The past is never dead. It's not even past." That's William Faulkner, without whom we should not be surveying this territory.
--http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... rticles%29
Here, for when we need it next, is an account of how all the constitutional amendments (not skipping the Second) have been limited over the years.
Extra credit: who said this?
“What the opinion Heller said is that it will have to be decided in future cases. What limitations upon the right to bear arms are permissible. Some undoubtedly are, because there were some that were acknowledged at the time. For example, there was a tort called affrighting, which if you carried around a really horrible weapon just to scare people, like a head ax or something, that was I believe a misdemeanor. So yes, there are some limitations that can be imposed.”
If you answered Antonin Scalia, you're right.