More on the Second Amendment

The District of Columbia will be defending its ban against handguns at the United States Supreme Court later this month and they are arguing this question: "Whether the Second Amendment forbids the District of Columbia from banning private possession of handguns while allowing possession of rifles and shotguns." There are all kinds of legal implications about this case, but I will wait for those that grasp them better to explain them.

I wanted, however, to update you on the other side of the coin. Reports indicate that all the suspects involved in the death of my friend's son are either citizens or legal residents of the United States and they have pled guilty to the charges before them. They are all from "good" homes (therefore there was no "gang" involvement) and it really was a simple case of wrong place wrong time. That being said, please explain to me, again, why it is necessary for everyone to own a gun? A young man would be alive today if there were more restrictions about who could own them, how they are stored and the credential needed to posses, carry and use them. I cannot support the argument that if more people had guns there would be fewer gun deaths. It is counter intuitive and makes no logical sense. But then, like many things in the United States, it is just one more.