[ReelinRod]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

First, I like the notion that we respect the constitution. And I really don't like the prospect of ignoring parts of the constitution that we don't happen to like.

That is a position that no gun rights supporter can disagree with.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Along those lines, I believe that law-abiding folks ahould have reasonable access to guns for hunting, target shooting, and/or protection.

But that statement could, on it's face be seen as violating your opening sentence or at least setting it up for violation. If we were really concerned with respecting the Constitution we would not be trying to discern what the citizen is allowed to do but discussing what the government is allowed to do.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

But I don't get the availability of assault rifles.

The 2nd Amendment was enacted with a very plain and understood object; to ensure the continuation of the general militia concept so that both the states and the federal government would have a ready pool of properly equipped citizens available to aid the civil authority. In times of need, the civil power can summon a large group of citizens at a moments notice and have them muster with appropriate arms and ammunition supplied by themselves and a couple days provisions. That's the primary intent of the 2nd Amendment for as long as the government obeys the Constitution.

Also part of the 2nd Amendment's object is to preserve the fundamental principle that the people retain the final right to rescind their consent to be governed by a government no longer abiding by the principles of its establishment.

The only way for the founders to ensure that those objects could be fulfilled/maintained/preserved was to secure from government's reach the means to achieve those objects; the already existing, individual right to keep and bear arms.

The Amendment does not create, grant, give or otherwise establish the right, it merely recognizes and secures it from government action. The right is not dependent in any manner on the Constitution in general or the 2nd Amendment specifically, for its existence.

Here's where it gets sticky and where it is vitally important that we do respect the Constitution . . . Even though the general right does not depend on the Amendment, SCOTUS has said the levels of government's protection of the right has been framed by the object of the 2nd Amendment's declaration and guarantee.

Long standing case law has inspected this question and has created a criteria to decide if an arm has 2nd Amendment protection. That criteria is, if it is the type of arm currently employed in civilized warfare and that it constitutes the ordinary military equipment and can be employed advantageously in the common defense of the citizen.

If one were to apply this longstanding criteria without prejudice, the type of arms that have been assigned the moniker of 'assault weapon' are the type of weapon that near absolute 2nd Amendment protection must be applied (deemed 'strict scrutiny' when a law is challenged).

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Only law enforcement and the military are legitimately in need of that ability.

Given the fact that the Federalist's, the promoters of a strong central government, endorsed the principle that whatever federal standing army could be amassed it should be opposed by a ratio of 17-20 armed citizens to 1 soldier, I can hardly agree that government forces should enjoy such an "ability". (Interestingly, Madison's 1788 ratios remain nearly spot-on today; 308 million total souls, 2.9 million active and reserve military, a general militia of 65+ million citizens with arms in their hands)

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

It's a lot harder to kill large numbers of people with a handgun than it is to do it with these weapons. If these guns were banned, it seem sto me that we all become a bit safer, and I don't feel that amounts to a significant loss of freedom.

Again, none of that holds legal weight. You would need to demonstrate the source of government's power to do the actions you want.