As far as I've seen, most posts have disagreed with points from my first post, and not been personal attacks and the like. I'm guessing that most trouble other people have had has come from the way they've presented themselves (ie they were looking for trouble.)
On guns: Conversely, could we argue that most existing firearms legislation is unconstitutional because it is too restrictive of the types of arms that citizens are allowed to carry? Looking at New Orleans again, it's not too hard to concieve of a situation where gun control laws prevented the populance from posessing the weaponry that would allow them to protect themselves from criminals. Since the Second Amendment was created to allow citizens to defend themselves, and the hypothetical gun control laws prevented citizens from doing that effectively, it could be said that such laws were an illegal restriction on the rights of citizens to defend themselves and should be abolished.
I think Katrina will probably be a boost to those who want to let people keep their guns. The government was obviously not there when people needed it to be there, and its a bit hard to argue that legally obtained guns cause crimes when the guns in the hands of looters were stolen and the only thing protecting some people were their own personal weapons.
Most of the responses I've seen have been replying to points in my first post, and not personal attacks or the like. I'm guessing that problems other people have had have come from the way they presented themselves (ie they were looking for trouble)
On guns: Conversely, could we argue that most existing gun legislation is illegal because it is too restrictive of the types of arms citizens are allowed to carry? As pointed out somewhere in the thread, the Second does specify arms, not guns specifically.
I think Katrina will probably be a boost to those who want to let citizens keep their guns. In this situation the government was not there when people needed it to be there, so the only defense they could rely on was what they could come up with themselves. And its a bit hard to argue that legally obtained weapons caused crime when the guns in the hands of looters were stolen, and legally obtained weapons were the ones doing the defending.