But we still want them for the same reasons. You want to go to the shooting range, and I want to blow up junker cars in my back yard. We're both law abiding citizens, we're not going to be using them for any kind of harm against someone else...so once again, why shouldn't I be allowed to own one?
I can make the argument that when the constitution was written, it was a different time where one needed to protect themselves moreso than we do now. We has a new government which we didn't know if we could trust. The British army could have showed up at any time wihtout us knowing, and thus a gun would have been good to have at all times. People on the outskirts of the colonies faced Indian attacks, so a gun was a must. Also, people hunted on a daily basis to provide there families with food, especially during the winter months when crops weren't growing.
I could also make the point that when the Constitution was written there were no assault rifles/machine guns/etc, so why do you get to automatically transfer "bear arms" that was written in a time with shotguns, simple rifles, and revolvers, to "bear any bullet shooting weapon I can get my hands on" 230 years later?
