Quote Originally Posted by Gary Slusser View Post
I fully support the 2nd amendment saying we the people have the right to keep and bear arms. I suggest the federal government should not have any more powerful arms than the residents of the country have unless it is voted on and passed by majority to be able to amend the constitution.

I also fully believe that was meant to provide a means of rebellion by the people against an overpowering federal government; as we have today.

I believe most if not all the gun control laws of today are unconstitutional and that the current federal government is doing their damnedest to do something to curtail that right.
I just want to make sure I understand where you're coming from. Regarding my earlier comments about private citizens having the Constitutional right to own and bear chemical, nuclear and bio-weapons... do you agree with this or not?
And, are you saying that our current federal government is "overpowering" and should be rebelled against? I'm not sure I'm clear on that point.

Quote Originally Posted by Gary Slusser View Post
...tougher gun registration and more types of guns being banned and very wide sweeping all encompassing definition language being used to define the allowable arms. And if you read it, there will be none allowed.
I'm sorry, I don't think I'm following you... what is the bill you're talking about?