Troll "BillMcD" --

You're full of shit.

The fine details about the type of gun is irrelevant -- the far-right lunatic fringe ALREADY dismisses EVERYTHING it wants to dismiss, regardless truth or accuracy of it. Exactly as you dismiss the actual content of the Second Amendment, the first draft of which follows, because it doesn't suit your far-right lunatic fringe gun-nut intellectual dishonesty:

"The right of the people (PLURAL, as in, "We the people"; it is not, "We the individual," or, "I the people") to keep and bear arms*, shall not be infringed; a well armed, and well regulated militia (NOT "individual") being the best security of a free country (NOT "individual"): but no person (INDIVIDUAL) religiously scrupulous of (AGAINST) bearing arms, shall be compelled (INVOLUNTARY) to render military service (NOT "self-defense") in person." Creating the Bill of Rights (Johns Hopkins, 1991), Veit, et al., at 12.
_____

*The Bill of Rights was drawn from existing state constitutions/bills of rights, adopted during 1776-77, 1780. That which became the Second Amendment was drawn from the MILITIA Clauses of FOUR of those state constitutions/bills of rights. Those MILITIA Clauses are the source of the phrase, "the right of the people," etc., and is usually associated, directly, with the phrase, "A standing army being dangerous to liberty,".

One of the four from which that phrase, and thus the Second Amendment, was drawn was Vermont's (framed July 2-8, 1777):

"Chapter I.

"XV. The people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State; and, as standing armies, in the time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

Note the use of the word AND: it is not "OR"; nor is there allowance for "defending against" gov't/rule of law.

As well, the Founders/Framers separated the bearing of arms by the PUBLIC institution MILITIA -- which is a MILITARY FORCE, not a weekend barbeque-and-squirrel-shoot -- and the private, individual ownership of guns. Here is the separate securing of the latter, including limitations constraining it:

"Chapter II.

"Section XXXIX. That the inhabitants of this State, shall have liberty to hunt and fowl, in seasonable times, on the lands they hold, and on other lands (not enclosed;) and, in like manner, to fish in all boatable and other waters, not private property, under proper regulations, to be hereafter made and provided by the General Assembly."

Note that it does not include "defend against" gov't/rule of law, or "self-defense".

A gun is a gun is a gun: the only purpose for a gun is to kill, regardless the far-right lunatic fringe pseudo-intellectual fetishizing of the finer points of the irrelevant.

Red.. no, I didn't miss your point. I addressed it right off. I feel your statement was unrealistic, given the history in this country of political assassinations over the past 150 years. "Keeping an eye on them" ignores the inefficiency and ineptitude of the Secret Service. Far better to get this stuff out in the open, let the citizens of the country become aware of the necrotic tissue in their system. Just as the public has the right to information about sex offenders and the right to publicize such information, we should also be informed of groups in America who advocate the death of the President. In this case, I think the media is doing us a service, even though I suspect they don't give a crap about the morality of it. Sex, blood, and fire are the Leads the media looks for.

Don't let them hide, let the sunlight show us who they are, question them, grill them on their thinking and make them declare their intentions.

Then lock them up and toss the key into the sewer.

And wow, it took a long time to get down to read your reply. I had to wade thru the all-too-common litany of nit-pickers, hair-splitters and fine-print specialists arguing about how many machine guns can dance on the head of a pin. Such discussions dilute and weaken the real issue: does society truly believe that owning/carrying a deadly firearm is more of a benefit than a drawback. I think its a lose-lose situation. It defiles my right to peace and serenity while I am in public and puts those who carry the weapons at far greater risk of injury or death than had they simply used their heads and walked an extra block to avoid trouble.

And who knows, maybe Chris Broughton is an FBI plant, there to stir up the gun nuts. Hey, its happened before. And it'd be like the FBI to shove a BLACK agent out there, fine-tuned senses of humor that the Hooverites have.

Well, that might have been a little bit over the top :-)

But you get the idea. If the SS isn't up to it, dump 'em. Let somebody qualified do the job and the SS can go back to tracking down counterfeiters and bootlegged Xerox color copiers.

The whole point behind these carefully-worded public comments, is to send a dog-whistle type coded message to any 'lone wolf' out there who might want to get up to some Booth- or Oswald-style shenanigans.

Remember during last year's campaign when the KKK put out its 'endorsement' of Obama over McCain? Same thing. Likewise with the ludicrous 'white hat and tails' so-called "plot" against Obama that was "uncovered" during a police interrogation. Publicity stunts.

Giving these shitbags media coverage just helps them to get their wink-wink nudge-nudge message out there.

According to the gun-nuts, everything is a Second Amendment issue.

"right to keep and bear arms"

That phrase, being exclusive to Militia Clauses, has only to do with public military institutions.

And how tightly restricted is THAT right?

The MA-Bay colony's "first" militia, the "Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company," which one cannot doubt as to patriotic loyalty, from time to time parades through downtown Boston. There is a specific provision in MA state law that requires that the guns they carry during such ceremonies NOT be loaded, and perhaps even be disabled so they cannot fire.

Their patriotic loyalty not being subject to doubt, the intent is obviously to protect public safety, even though it is probable that the members of that "Company" are not unhinged gun-nuts.