RIGHTS COME WITH RESPONSIBILITIES. When an NRA member writes, in National Rifleman magazine, that people who seek safety laws to assure responsible use of firearms (aka gun control) want to "take away our rights," he is badly mistaken..
The RIGHT to bear firearms in the US Constitution is directly linked to the notion of a well-regulated militia. The only way I can read that other is that you get to have a gun because you want to prepare (as in, practice) for standby service with the National Guard. Guns for sport hunting make sense if you like to eat game animals, so long as you don't shoot them (or, I suppose, your hunting companion) out of season.
But I truly don't understand how anyone can say it's perfectly OK to impose war on the world from your back yard or some public plaza, just because you happen to have a love-thing with ammunition.
A driver doesn't get to drive a tank - or a bus, a semi, a motorcycle, without passing a test to demonstrate/prove that s/he knows how to drive that particular machine safely.
Why isn't that true with deadly weapons?