I already gave you an example, one of the best by the way.
I'll deffer to La Pierre and Obama on the rest, as it has already been detailed quite eloquently by BP.
Plain and simple, some people should not be allowed to own fire arms. Like has been mentioned here, some people think I should not be able to. But if that question of fitness is well defined and agreed upon, with due process for recourse, then we start to address the elephant in the room, which is that some people should not be able to own firearms.
This is not a question of the proletariat, or egalitarian access to rights. If we keep throwing our selves in the same category as those on a terrorist watch list(I'm guessing most should be on there) then that's where we are telling the world that we belong, while making the "law abiding gun owner" argument, it does not add up.
It's like people in the MJ legalization movement(I hate to use the analogy) that put some stoner out there telling us half coherently how "you can make rope out of it", while being stoned out of their minds. As long as we play the paranoid, persecuted role, that's what we are going to get, and much of it by the design of some people.
Out..........................