As we enter 2013, the government is trying to erode our Second Amendment rights. Whether you support firearm ownership are not, you need to realize that our Founding Fathers put this position into the Constitution for a reason. Our Founders believed that the people of this country should be as armed as our government.
If we allow our employees (the government) to decide which rights we do have and cannot have, then they cease to be rights. You may be OK with restricting OUR Second Amendment rights, but will you be just as OK when they start coming for other rights? Without the Second Amendment, we don’t have any other rights.

Comments
Another wacko!
Wacko, he's right, they will take our rights away little by little, wake up. Progressives call it BABY STEPS, read up.
Wrong. The Founding Fathers did not believe that the public should be as armed as the government. Their intent was that there not be a standing army, but a force at the ready for national defense. The intent of the 2nd Amendment (upheld a dozen times until the current Court ruling) was to establish, as it states in opening verse, "A well regulated militia,...". Read The Federalist and papers of those founding fathers. I don't have a problem with people owning a weapon (it's too ingrained in the American culture to reverse) I had one myself once (and, yes, I'm a veteran too). But to proclaim all our rights stem from the 2nd Amendment is too ignore the basic tenents Constitution itself.
Mark: The government is not trying to take guns away, it is our fellow citizens. If a portion of the public was not screaming "Gun control!", they would merrily go about their business figuring out how to manage their investments.
97Bravo: Not sure which Federalist papers you been reading, but there are many references in them that state the purpose of the 2A amendment was to prevent tyranny of the government.
The court case you refer to was Miller. It involved a sawed off shotgun. The court stated that weapons had to be of a type used by the military. Interesting. With that ruling, it is apparent that gun owners today could easily point at it and say current attempts to ban AR15's is flying in the face of the Supreme Court ruling in 1939, since the AR15 is according to anti gunners "A military style assault weapon" used by our military.
In Switzerland every man must have a gun....in their home. Remember during the riots in Romney Kings beatings when the Korean store owners protected their property with guns because the police were overwhelmed by looters and rioters. Then who is to say down the road with some of our politicians would not look for a dictatorship....not as crazy as you think. The government wants to control every part of our life now...birth to death....jobs and where you can build your plants (Boeing)....and do you think if there was an uprising that someone like Pres. Obama would not hesitate to use force so he can stay in power....if the people marched like they did in Egypt & Syria because of the way he was governing....and maybe should have been made to step down like Pres. Nixson was for Watergate. Yet we have Benghazi which 4 people died and that is nothing to them and it is a cover up, but the media will never follow up on that because this is a democrat.
Where can I buy my surface-to-air missles? That's the sort of stuff I'll need if I'm going to be "as armed as our government." Will they require a background check for that?
Per our founder's intent, please Google: "shay's rebellion" and "whiskey rebellion"
Please Google: American Revolution.
You will note that the war did NOT start over taxes, it started when the Brits marched on Concord to seize firearms. Now why would they do that? Could it be so that those pesky fellow citizens of their could not forcibly resist? Noooooo. Say it isn't so!
The Founding Fathers are dead. Most American Indians are dead. Most bears and wolves are dead. State militias are very much functioning, although mostly in Afghanistan right now. It is ridiculous to think that the 2nd ammendment means that citizens should have the same weapons as the army or police.
Yup, it is really ridiculous if you are one of those who want to make sure that any law or edict you decide to enact should not be met with armed resistance.