Nancy, I don't know if you have read a NRA magazine but I started getting them about 6 months ago and it's clear to me what OB's stance on private ownership of guns is and that is that he is against it.  I don't care what the left or OB says now to get votes he is against citizens owning handguns to protect themselves and their families.  Hillary is nearly as bad.

I am happy that you recognized the fact that politicians on both sides of the spectrum have been known to flip-flop or dance around certain sensitive subjects.  Both Obama and McCain have been quite ambiguous on many topics, but I think it is quite obvious that McCain has recently been having trouble picking a side (immigration, gun control, gay-rights, Iraq policy, etc.).

In most European and Eastern countries no one is allowed to possess or own guns of any sort.  They have much less violence in the streets and their society is safer because of it.  I'm not quite sure why Americans want to cling to their rights to own a firearm, it is a very peculiar phenomenon.  Show me a man who loves his guns and I'll show you a man who is trying to compensate for something missing in his life.  I'm currently living in Beijing, China teaching English.  All of my students have many questions about American culture, one of the main ones being about gun ownership.  My students have a hard time fathoming, first: how so many Americans can shamelessly shoot and murder one another, and two: why anyone in their right mind would want to have a gun inside their own home.   Americans should be ashamed of how "proud" they are about gun ownership.  It is the 21st century now, let's start acting like it.

Sorry you feel that way Collin.  Maybe you should check the statistics of states here in the US rather than compare us to the world.  Whether you like it or not, there are gangs roaming around on the streets and a lot of crime.  You do as you choose, but I intend to protect myself from it to the best of my ability.

What is missing from this commentary is that this Supreme Court decision was a huge landmark.  Never before in the history of our nation has the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment is a personal rather than a collective right.  What's also interesting is that striking down the DC law goes against the entire history of our nation with "no-carry" rules in certain towns all across the frontier.

I totally support the right to bear arms.  I like guns and like shooting them.  I think Obama misses the mark on this one in following a very, dare I say, "activist" decision by the Supreme Court.

I read that the neigboring states where guns were allowed ,as opposed to DC, the crime rate was a heck of a lot lower.

Also note Tom, what the vote was.  It sure wasn't a landslide.

No, Nancy, it wasn't a landslide at all.

Part of the reason neighboring states* would have lower crime rates is that the entirety of DC is densely urban.  If you look at a map of the area though, you'll see that the crime doesn't stop at any of DC's borders: http://www.washingtonpost.c...

If it were true that the lack of guns made DC less safe, you'd assume that those folks in Maryland and Virginia would be armed to the teeth and holding back the hordes.  Isn't happening.

*I say this as a shortcut, since DC isn't actually a state.  Of course now, this isn't much of a shortcut either.

In this case an inch is as good as a mile but it's a little unsettling that the vote was so close.  Also true is that the neighboring states aren't as dense and that it would be impossible to say that the crime starts and stops at the state, or "District's" borders as there's bound to be spillover, but there are other cities that have a dense population rate with a lower crime rat.  DC has long been known to have the highest crime rate.  Now that the justices have ruled, I guess we'll see if it actually makes a difference in DC's crime rate.

At the very least, it will make some previously illegal gun owners, legal  :-)

Collin is typical of the simpering nitwits that want to compare apples to oranges and tell us how some other society is so much better than ours because they have been disarmed. He tells us that the Chinese, a totally subverted communist society with little or no personal freedoms seems to think that we should be ashamed because we have the freedom and the right to own firearms if we so desire. While his students may have a hard time fathoming why we own guns, I have a hard time fathoming why they would cower down to a totalitarian Govt. who in the past has slaughtered thousands of their fellow countrymen. Oh yeah , that's right, their Govt. has all the guns and they are servile.  As far as crime goes in those country's with total gun control, the nattering anti gun nitwits would like you to believe that they are utopian like due to the lack of guns while failing to mention that many of these country's have the highest crime rates on the planet and just use different means to kill each other. (Our British cousins are very fond of knives.)  Then we have the constitutionally challenged Tom who obviously failed US History and thinks that the supreme court decision was activist.  No Tom, the four supremes  that dissented are the activists and would seem to be as constitutionally challenged as yourself.

In the UK, home invasion robberies while occupied are much higher than in the U.S.

Know why Collin?

Responsible gun ownership is a concept you cannot seem to grasp You see some bling bling draped rapper holding his handgun sideways and lump them in with responsible gun owners -- all are the same to you.........

You commit a crime with a gun -- you lose your privilege to ever own one again. You are a responsible citizen, you should have the right to gun ownership.

You want us to emulate the Euros, Chinese, etc.? I suspect  your real agenda extends beyond that of mere gun ownership.

Doesn't it?

What's the biggest source of handguns for Federal Inmates, the answer is surprising.

The number of English police officers shot has increased by 60% in four years.  They have a very restrictive gun ban, not working to well apparently.  Anyone here feel they use guns as a compensation for something?  I like the  idea of being able to defend me and mine with force at least equal to what I would expect a bad guy to have if he were to try to harm me.  I agree Charlie the dissenting judges are the activists.

Show me a man who loves his guns and I'll show you a man who is trying to compensate for something missing in his life. - collinwinn

Well, I own several guns. I am not a man, and I am not trying to compensate for anything missing in my life. My life is wonderful. So there goes your ridiculous theory.

why anyone in their right mind would want to have a gun inside their own home.   Americans should be ashamed of how "proud" they are about gun ownership. 

My husband and I agree that it is our right to defend ourselves and our child from intruders. Why should we be ashamed of wanting to protect ourselves?

collinwinn- do you have compensation issues per-chance?

I'm just trying to compensate for being 5"2", female, single, total lack of martial arts training, lack of kevlar, lack of eyes in the back of my head, lack of living in a bunker...you know..things like that. 

I realize that standing on my tiptoes and spreading my arms out might fool a bear into thinking I'm big and bad, but it's not likely to fool a burgler or a banger who might feel he has a right to my property.

LOL Nancy!!!  Before I met and married my husband, I lived alone, too. I was having a hard time sleeping. Being a young female, I was scared to be all by myself. My dad and I went and bought a gun. He took me to the range and taught me how to shoot. From then on, I slept much, much better.

Well said!  I am an American that is not ashamed to be a "PROUD" gun owner of three handguns and I am currently considering adding to my collection with a shotgun, IMO a fantastic deterrent to a home invader.  And I too am female with nothing to prove.  BTW I am equally "PROUD" of my concealed weapon permit. 

I have debated whether or not to apply for a CCW. I have heard that they don't give them out much anymore. Too bad. I think most people who apply should be allowed to carry, provided they clear a background check. How many criminals will want to rob, rape, attack, carjack etc., if they know that they will likely be taken out first by a citizen who is "packing" and doesn't feel like being another victim today?

Wesleysmommy, I've been intending to do that but have just been too lazy.  I'd like to have a differnt gun before I take the training though.   I'm on the road by myself a lot at night and would like to have the ccw.

"The rate of firearm deaths among kids under age 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined." (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)

"American kids are 16 times more likely to be murdered with a gun, 11 times more likely to commit suicide with a gun, and nine times more likely to die from a firearm accident than children in 25 other industrialized countries combined." (Centers for Disease Control)

"Firearms are the second leading cause of traumatic death related to a consumer product in the United States and are the second most frequent cause of death overall for Americans ages 15 to 24. Since 1960, more than a million Americans have died in firearm suicides, homicides, and unintentional injuries. In 2003 alone, 30,136 Americans died by gunfire: 16,907 in firearm suicides, 11,920 in firearm homicides, 730 in unintentional shootings, and 232 in firearm deaths of unknown intent, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Nearly three times that number are treated in emergency rooms each year for nonfatal firearm injuries." (NRA)

No sense in arguing over gun ownership in America, regardless of party affiliation. Only mayors, local government officials and families who lost loved ones from bullets worry about handguns, because they know how much real damage occurs with their  growing availability. 

Americans trust no one, and they especially do not trust  themselves.

adampayne - guns don't kill people; people kill people. If you outlaw guns, people will just "shank" each other. Wait, nevermind, the criminals will still own guns so people will still be shot by thugs.

As far as suicide by firearm, you would have to also outlaw rope, razers, and pills to lower suicide rates.

I don't know what you mean about Americans not trusting themselves. Care to explain?

I trust myself completely...it's others I don't trust.

As long as we make sure Dick Cheney can't own or use a firearm, I'm okay with it.

WM, your quote that guns don't kill people is ludicrous. Guns do kill people, and only people use guns.

If Americans trusted and respected one another they wouldn't be armed to the teeth. I just don't see all that firepower really necessary to blast some duck or quail into oblivion. But guns really are not about hunting. Guns are about intimidation and power.  The gun has really one purpose and that is to kill something. The longer I live in this country the more convinced I become that this is a culture of death. If you want to argue with that go ahead. People in Canada own lots of guns, but they don't kill one another the way Americans do.

Maybe we are engaged in a civil war these days and nobody bothered to mention it to the public. In peace time we certainly would not be imprisoning millions of our own citizens for being poor and addicted to the wrong substances. We would not throw away the keys to the clink on them when their addiction resurfaced. In peace time people would not be afraid to sit on their front porch at night unarmed.

I'm glad you all feel safer holding onto all of your guns. I hope a relative of yours doesn't get crazy on any of you and shatter your illusions that you are so much safer for having them.

I have learned from experience here that facts never get in the way of really outrageous opinions.

I read a suggestion yesterday to find out where Omama really stands on the issue. Colt should present both McCain and Hussein with an engraved 1911 in honor of the Heller decision.  If Barry accepts, his far left wankers will nut up.  And if he turns it down, he'll probably lose all the bitter clingers of Appalachia and elsewhere he so needs now.