[John R.]

I appreciate this interesting discussion, having considered many of the points of view expressed. Here are a couple considerations.

First, not everyone who sounds like a psychopath on the internet is anywhere near being one in real life (conversely, I've no doubt that the real "nut jobs" frequently come across as normal in both settings).

Second, the thing I notice and enjoy most about these forums (and shooters in general) is a strong tradition of civility and respect, and a realistic understanding of what will happen if a gun must be used in self defense. At times, yes, comments are made that suggest a disturbing lack of common sense. But it is far from the norm.

But there is a big difference between expressing a concern that there appear to be people with arms and CCW permits who may be irresponsible, and advocating that rights should be revoked pre-emptively. I didn't hear Jim advocating that anyone should lose their rights, just concern that some seem disturbingly likely to abuse that right. I can't say I'm convinced by his examples, but I've seen enough to know there are people out there who are not really able to handle the responsibilities inherent in owning a firearm, much less carrying one on a daily basis.

I guess if it was up to me I would want to see the right to keep and bear arms respected as a right (duh) as opposed to something that can be denied as a matter of whim by local authorities. However, I would also want to have a high standard of competence, safety, and understanding of the legal issues around the ownership and defensive use of firearms. Is it possible to have real standards of competency and sanity without compromising the fundamental right?

John