[jluetjen]

At at the end of the day, the constitution has been amended, and in the future it (including this amendment) may be amended. Personally, of the rights and responsibilities described in the constitution, In my personal opinion the right of private civilians to bear arms is most likely the least worthy of continued support. There are numerous examples throughout the world of countries where the civilian population is armed to the teeth, and it has not prevented the assendency of corrupt, despotic leaders, invasion by foreign elements or the preservation of anyone's rights.

That being said, I certainly see the value of a well controlled "militia" as defined as a "part-time" army such as the National Guard, which is at least dotted-lined to the regular armed services. BTW, while the "National Guard" did not exist prior to 1903, there were numerous state raised militia units -- Teddy Roosevelt's "Rough Riders for instance, prior to that time. I also don't have a problem with gun ownership being a privalege of those citizens who have a record of acting responsibly, demonstrate adequate knowledge and judgment, and comply with the appropriate laws regarding use and storage of their guns.

Just my $0.02.