So your rights trump mine?

Personally, I feel safer (because I AM safer) when I know that in any crowd, there are at least a few background-checked licensed individuals carrying firearms, me included. So where's my right to peaceably assemble? And why must I be subjected to humilliating groping by poorly trained and even more poorly background-checked people, which seriously detracts from my "pursuit of happiness" just so that you can "feel" safer, while outside our boarding gate, undocumented immigrants with false IDs load the baggage, stock the food and should they be so inclined, plant their bombs on our airplane?

"majority of crime is because of poverty. Remove the causes, and all gang members would rather work for a living." Well, Bernie Madoff, along with a whole lot of bankers and mortgage lenders will be relieved to hear YOU, at least, don't consider their behavior criminal.

It is not poverty, per se, that causes violent crime, or there would be more female violent offenders than male, while in fact the ratio is about 90% male to 10% female. And plenty of violent criminals have an air conditioned house with a well stocked refrigerator waiting for them when they decide to snuggle in.

Why are car keys allowed in bars in every state? Is there anything more insane? Many thousands more people are killed every year by drunk drivers than by drunken licensed firearms carriers. In fact, in the average year, I doubt if ANYBODY is killed by a drunken CCW permit holder.

Nothing wrong with an audit if there is nothing to hide?

Seriously? I've had two IRS audits and one colonoscopy. The IRS ended up owing me money on both audits (a little) so clearly I had nothing to hide, and I had to pay through thru the . . . well, I had to pay quite a bit for the colonoscopy, but I'd rather do another one of those any day than another IRS audit. Takes less preparation, less time, less inconvenience, and far less humiliation. (Seriously, is it really my government's business how much I spend on dry cleaning per month, particularly when I'm not claiming it as a deduction?)

No one can speak for "the gun people" since we come in many varieties

but I can tell you why I want guns and the thousands of rounds of ammo I have for them.

I want and have a .22LR pistol for practice. The ammo is cheap (and cheaper still if purchased in bulk) so when it's on sale I buy a bunch, and try to keep about 5000 rounds on hand. (I buy rice, beans, flour, etc., in 25 lb. bags, too.) I can go through 100-200 rounds easily in one range session, especially if I take a a niece or nephew (they all shoot and it's a nice bonding activity), or a novice shooter friend along to introduce to the activity. (And every single friend has enjoyed it and come away with a new appreciation both for the sport and for the care that goes into safe firearm handling.)

I want and have a 9mm pistol for home defense. The ammo is more expensive, but I still need to practice with it, so go through about 50 rounds per practice session for me, and about the same for a companion. As always, I buy in bulk on sale, typically 4 boxes at a time of 250 rounds each. I try to keep about 2000-3000 rounds on hand. That gun's standard magazine holds 17 rounds, by the way, so some would consider it a "high capacity" magazine and try to ban it. I like it because I don't have to stop and reload the magazines as often when I'm at the range.

I have but don't much like a .380 pistol. If I can't figure out and fix why it keeps stovepiping, I'm getting rid of it. If it were reliable, I guess it would make an OK carry pistol but I'm not a fan of the caliber. I didn't buy it; got it from a friend in partial payment of a debt. Another thing some people would like to ban: The ability of private parties to buy and sell guns.

I want and am looking for a compact pistol for every-day carry. My current 9mm is just too big and heavy. I might get another 9mm but I might choose a .40 cal instead.

I want and have a .22LR rifle for small game hunting and rifle-shooting practice. It uses the same ammo as the .22LR pistol, so again, it's cheaper to practice with.

I have a couple of .30-30 rifles inherited from a parent. They're collector's items - never been shot, so I want a couple of other rifles for hunting purposes. And in the unlikely event I ever decide to live or work in an area potentially subject to total breakdown of police protection, as happened in LA in 1992 or New Orleans after Katrina.

I want and will probably someday get a revolver, just because I think they're interesting. Oh, and derringers are kind of cute. And 1911s have such historical significance. And then, once you've got a half-dozen or so, some people get bitten by the collector's bug and like a friend of mine, find themselves owning over 100 different guns.

Notice what's NOT on my list of reasons for having my guns: To shoot anybody who's not actively threatening to harm me or someone near me; to overthrow the government; to engage in vigilante actions; to shoot up schools, theaters, military bases, or other "gun-free zones" aka "crazies can shoot with impunity zones."

Say what?? I understand all the words, but the sentences make no sense.

Can you back up your claim that the NRA is "backing" Zimmerman?

I did a search on their website, and the only mentions of the Zimmerman/Martin case were discussions about how the Florida Stand Your Ground Law was irrelevant to the case, since the real question is a factual one of who was attacking whom, not whether anybody had an opportunity to retreat and chose not to take it. It was pretty clear from the summaries of the videos that the NRA was taking no position on whose version of the facts was correct.

The NRA was audited very thoroughly during the Clinton Administration's program of auditing opposition groups. I think it was 1995. IIRC, that fact came to light via an IRS whistleblower. Whether they've been audited since then would not usually be a matter of public record, so I'd be interested to know how you know that they haven't been.

A .45 with a clip

would be a real novelty! I'm not aware of any handguns that have clips; they either have cylinders if they're revolvers or magazines if they're pistols. I'm always amazed at how people who know nothing about a subject can develop such strong opinions about it. But from what I've seen of modern school curricula, forming a strong opinion and expressing it is the primary focus over learning a great deal about a subject before forming an opinion, and then being able to back it up with accurate information and sound logic.

I'm having trouble translating what you say into English

but if I understood you correctly, if it saves even one life "it" (presumably a total gun ban) would be worth it, but numerous reports of people using guns to save their own or others' lives is statistical noise. Is that supposed to make sense? And as an NRA member, how exactly do you propose to get rid of us if you've forsworn shooting us? Lethal injection for all of its several million members?