[NoGun]

I'm very pleased to meet you BarryLee. I can see that firearms are desirable for other things besides killing, however I feel that those advantages are out-weighed by the "dangers," if you will, to society as a whole and easily replaced by non-lethal options. Bear in mind, I'm not trying to say that I know what's best for you or anyone else, just my personal and uneducated (on the subject) opinion.

most likely are attracted to firearms just like some are attracted to automobiles, fine watches or nice fountain pens. We see them as interesting mechanical items or even works of art.

This makes sense, especially for the historical value. However, if this is the case, why would these art pieces need to be functional?

We enjoy recreational shooting just blasting away at paper targets. Yes, it sounds stupid, but ever think about how hitting a little ball in a hole with a stick sounds?

It doesn't sound stupid at all! I've shot skeet myself and it was fun. However, again, I don't see the need for semi-automatic handguns for these sports, when accurized pellet-guns or even black powder firearms are available.

There are some of us that hunt and yes this means killing animals, but I suspect you’ll find hunters are some of the greatest lovers of nature.

I have no problem with hunting, and think hunters (like Theodore Roosevelt) have done more for conservation than any and all other groups combined. However, black powder or even crossbows would seem to already work quite well..

while there may be other options firearms still remain one of the best choices.

And why is that? They seem to be as dangerous to surrounding bystanders (at least in police shootings) as to the intended target, have a horrible stop ratio, cause more property damage, and the list goes on..

Finally I would remind you of the Right to own firearms granted to us by the Constitution. Many of us still believe in freedom and personal responsibility.

While I understand the "Heller" decision and all that, the constitution was framed in a different time. Firearms, and the best, were absolutely necessary then. The same is not so true today. Plus, it is accepted that the 2nd Amendment is subject to reasonable restrictions. We already cannot buy mortars, machine-guns and cruise missiles, for the public good. If, something less-lethal but more effective came along for self defense, wouldn't it be better for society to embrace it and pass semi-automatic firearms into realm of military-only use?