Passion for 2nd Amendment not needed

Yes, I do understand and respect – but reject as founded on needless worries – the argument that citizens need to be armed in case they need to protect themselves from thugs or from the government.

And, despite my sometime irreverence, I do appreciate the passionate belief, which many have, in gun rights and in the 2nd Amendment.

But some seem to believe that the constitution is a sacred document. I don't.

… Not that a gun in my hands wouldn't make me dangerous to myself and innocent bystanders, anyway, but for the sake of argument let's pretend that I'm fully physically coordinated….

And not that I'm brave – but, I am willing to risk requiring myself (hypothetically able-bodied) and others to be unarmed, because I believe that we have enough political rights that we would remain free and be safer if we enacted two measures that I concede are unlikely even to be considered any time soon: a repeal of the 2nd Amendment and a national handgun ban….

I'm more afraid of crazy citizens with guns than I am of American cops, soldiers and politicians.

Many would argue that guns need to be legally available to ward off potential dictators and so that the good folks could protect themselves from the bad ones who would and do carry guns legally or not. I believe that the proliferation of guns is the more dangerous threat, and that we should have a strict national handgun ban on possession, sale and manufacture.

I believe that enough enforcement could control handguns.

And I don't think it remotely probable that any group of righteous (or riotous) armed people could successfully oppose the police or the overwhelmingly mighty U.S. military (anyone who tried could create a bloody mess), and I'd be justifiably very afraid if it could.

Basically, I believe the power of Americans comes from ballots, not bullets.