Lifetime

So are you implying that the 1st Amendment doesn't or shouldn't protect other forms of expression other than speech?

Not quite what I said, but if it makes you feel better, go ahead and interpret it that way.

Oh and the Supreme Court majority sides with "gun rights above all else"?

Again, people applying a 21st Century take on an 18th Century document. Add to that the fact that the Supreme Court has a majority of Justices who already side with the "gun rights above all else" crowd, and you aren't going to get an objective interpretation anyway.

The Second Amendment isn't the only amendment to get a skewed interpretation. The First Amendment, which protects free speech, has been more broadly interpreted to protect all manner of expression, including burning an American flag, which isn't speech at all.

It would. I don't think these shooters would wait around for an assault weapon if they have hand guns.

So then it wouldn't help?

With whom are you speaking arch?

Completely stop? No. 

Since people cry "constitutional right" on this issue, I am more interested in the intentions of the people who wrote the amendment than the interpretations of those applying it a century or more later to a context for which it was never written. That isn't the entire picture, I grant you, but I am looking at it from the perspective of the authors of the amendment. They could not have possibly imagined AK-47s and high capacity handguns when they wrote this. Weapons were flintlock and had to be loaded one round at a time when this was conceived. Killing dozens of people in a short period of time with a firearm was impossible.

IMO, if you need an assault rifle for home defense, you are either an incredibly bad shot who will undoubtedly injure or kill uninvolved people in the process, or your home is being invaded by Navy SEALS, in which case you're screwed anyway.

I'm not trying to take your guns. I just believe that there are some that should be confined to military and law enforcement use. This isn't the 1700s.

Human life. If James Holmes, for example, had only the Glock gun there is no way 70 people would have been shot.

I just don't see the purpose of a 30+ round drum/magazine/clip. I'm not yet sure of my stance on restricting the actual gun, but there is no reason to hold large amounts of bullets.

You should read the USSC rulings on the subject as well as most state constitutions on this subject.

VHF- I think you are reading the 2nd Amendment incorrectly or incompletely.

Near where I work:

 

The Counter in Santa Monica

 

The San Fransico Saloon in West Los Angeles

 

Johnnies Pastrami in Culver City

 

Rae's Restaurant in Santa Monica

if he had kept his mouth shut and hadn't acted like a spurned lover, no one would be talking about him.

I have no problems viewing and using the full site version with chrome. I don't really like Firefox on tablets. Very buggy with Dolphin and Maxthon both of which typically handle most content well. I prefer u sing the full site version on my tablet but will use the mobile version on my phone. Not complaining just letting you know what I'm experiencing.

Haven't looked at the site via desktop yet, but on my tablet I've tried different browsers and the only one that seems to be able to handle it is Chrome.