US Constitution - Second Amendment

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

This is fairly simple, to my way of thinking. The colonists had just gained their independence from the harsh regime of the British. One of the main reasons the British were able to maintain control, over the colonists, was their military. The British had an extensive military presence in America. When the seeds of rebellion began to spring up, it was used to try and bring the colonials back into submission.

The founding fathers knew that the only true security the people could ever hope to have, was through the arming of it's citizens. This was not only security from foreign invaders, but also from a tyrannical government. The government, especially in the earlier days, always had the memory of what happened to the last tyrannical government they sat under. They knew that they could only go so far, before the people would revolt. The "well regulated Militia" was not just to maintain the "security of a free State" from foreign invaders. A well-armed citizenry ensured the security of our freedoms, from an overbearing government. This is as true today, as it was 200 years ago.

Our founding fathers knew that the only hope this nation had to stay free from it's enemies, both foreign and domestic, the people had to be willing to take up arms, when necessary, in it's defense. The only reason we have the liberties we enjoy today is because brave men and women were willing to take up arms against an oppressive government. They were willing to risk not only their own lives, but the lives of their families. Where has this kind of commitment gone? We have become a nation full of pansies, constantly looking for a handout. What happened to the days when men stood up, and earned their keep? Why is it men no longer take pride in their work? No matter how menial it may seem. There was a time, not that long ago, when men were gentlemen, and it's considered an honorific term. But, I digress.

Ultimately, it comes down to this. The government ought to be subsidizing gun ownership, not limiting it. The U.S. Code states that "The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard." So, if they want to provide training for the citizenry, fine. Take a look at a country like Switzerland. They can be neutral, because noone has any desire to invade them. Every citizen is required to own a gun, and be able and ready to use it. What nation is going to mess with that. Also, the government knows it cannot do too much, without the consent of the people, or else the people will use those same guns to regain their freedom.