They may be true but the second amendment is being misinterpreteded , am I allowed to have a rocket launcher in my drive way, or how about a tank in my back yard, how about a bazooka,

Whares the common sence?

Well if weapons/guns don't kill people then why not send armies out to war with just their fists? It would save a hell of a lot of money. Or send the trophy hunter out with a knife to take down the lion.

Nuclear weapons don’ kill people, people kill people.

Sure, to be perfectly honest guns don't kill people bullets kill people. George Carlin said that as one MORE way to show how truly deficient this argument is.

I fear the little or no knowledge, progressives have about firearms... Taints their view. Ignorance is no answer.

Anything that will make it more difficult to obtain illegal weapons helps cut the carnage.

Agreed. People kill people. So stop needlessly giving people the means to kill people easily quickly and efficiently. Its not fucking rocket science!

nraspeak

That has always been asinine and it continues to be asinine. Fewer incidents makes it worth changing the laws. “Guns don’t kill people people kill people”... By that logic one can assume as many people are killed with spatulas as guns? The people who kill will find it more difficult with tougher laws and no, it won’t be perfect ... are you saying if you can’t save everyone you shouldn’t save anyone?... Also, I happen to be a gun owner. The desire is not to take all guns away... assault wepons are not needed and background checks, age restrictions and waiting periods might save someone you know.

You sound like a level headed guy, and your assessment above was spot on. If you are interested you are more than welcome to join- "Pro Gun Rights"
If by chance you are not fond of liberal progressive politics- "Conservative Atheists" If otherwise, then you could just disregard the latter group. Take care, cheers.