I understand your concern, and appreciate the explanation you provided. I respectfully disagree in so far as in the United States, the right of the people to k

I understand your concern, and appreciate the explanation you provided. I respectfully disagree in so far as in the United States, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Your interpretation that this requires the bearers to be part of a 'well regulated militia' has not been the interpretation of the appellate courts nor the supreme court. Definitions change over time, and 'well regulated' meant 'well equipped' and 'militia' was the entire body of males able to fight. More to the point, however, the appellate courts and the supreme court state that the key part of this is 'the people' and not the explanation as to why the right exists. I absolutely believe you have the right to have your opinion that guns are dangerous, and that we need to do something about them. At this time, however, that will require changing the US Constitution and I believe that is not likely to happen in the future. There are only a few ways for the constitution to be changed, and getting this changed as an amendment is likely never to happen and calling for a constitutional convention could result in massive changes across the board that noone can imagine right now.