Semi-automatic hand guns and semi-automatic riffles (assualt riffles) should absolutely be legal to own.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
It seems to me that this is about having well regulated and armed populous to deter tyranny.
Given our three choices: 1) no guns, 2) regulated guns and 3) unregulated guns, I think #2 is the clear choice and the debate should be over the amount of regulation.
And, the ammendment clearly states "well regulated".
IMO, we should have a "shooter's license" to own/shoot a gun much like we have a "driver's license" to drive a car. And, with this license comes regular competency testing and training. And, with a valid shooter's license, a person should be able to walk into a gun store/show and buy any gun/amo without a background check or a waiting period.
Obviously, the right to bear arms does not include aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, fighter jets, attack helicopters, gunships, drones and tanks so we will always be out armed by our military. Never the less, with "arms" we can put up a fight in hand to hand combat. A great deterant to tyranny.
Regarding home security defending against criminals, it's not clear to me that this was an objective of the 2nd ammendment. It's more a side effect of the right to bear arms as a well regulated malitia.
Last edited by diamonddad; 12-26-2012 at 1:19 PM.