Been there, done that. Home break-in, stolen car stereos, and an ATM robbery... one's emotional state should not influence Constitutional analysis. Apparently you still are "boo-frickin-hoo-ing" over your losses, and figure that the Constitution takes a back seat to your whiny fears.
Oh, and by the way, since you are more likely to commit a crime than my wheelchair-bound grandmother, you won't mind a few charges coming your way for the future potential crimes that you have yet to commit. We're all sure you'll understand.
Oh? What's that? It shouldn't apply to you, oh elitist one? You didn't foresee that letting unConstitutional applications stand unopposed would encourage further instances? You were too stupid to realize that if it happens to someone else, it can happen to you? Hm! Who could've predicted that!
You have said over and over that prohibiting felons from owning guns is uncounstitutional. Over, and over and over. Yet, have offered nothing to back that up. I have shown Federal laws explaining and detailing what is included. Just because you can repeat something, does not make it true. On what grounds is limiting the ability of felons to obtain firearms uncounstitutional?
Do you have a family member that is a felon loser? You seem bent on giving the criminal element weapons, which will likely be used on the non-crimial element. And those who somehow manage to get through life without committing felonies are elitists? Newsflash for you, about 98% of the american population is 'elitist' in that we have somehow managed to make it through life without committing a felony.
And it's true, that I am probably more likely to commit a crime than your wheelchair-bound grandmother; and as soon as I follow through and commit a crime, then have my day in court; I will have earned limitations on my freedom. That's the difference. These losers earned the special restrictions on their freedom, at the cost to innocents and the american taxpayer.