Man arrested after tackling shopper carrying gun

===================================================
If there is no need for military style long guns, then why does nearly all of law enforcement have and use them?

A bi annual education/safety course seems silly in the sense that it is more then LEO's are required to perform and is more of a punishment and a tax to lawful gun owners. What happens after 6 months to a lawful gun owner that does not take a continuing education course, does he forget how to safely handle a firearm, is he arrested, are his fire arms confiscated?

When was the last time you took a firearms safety course? My last firearms safety course was over thirty years ago and I have not forgotten the basics and I have a shitty memory.

You argument is if the police have em we should?  I qualify 4xs per year and have additional training.  The continuing education is for people to,understand what a serious responsibility gun ownership is and to stay on top of any changing laws.  

==================================================

Exactly, because we all face the same threats.



======================================================================
Is gun safety training part of qualifying?




===============================================================
Excellent idea as long as the training is not mandatory, training and practice is good.

Are we giving civilians police cars and/or having them respond  911 calls too?   Mandatory training works because it shows if you want to own a gun you need to make a real commitment.  It's a great deterrent.  As for gun safety being a part of training of course it's never enough to understand the dangers of mishandling a weapon.  

So no 

I'm actually ok with the training part of your argument. I wouldn't have an issue with this.

Where things get interesting is where you say no need for military style long guns because of "our military's capabilities to squash any type of citizen uprising vs our government." In my opinion, this is the exact reason why we have the 2A.

I'm not a constitutional scholar but I am a history lover and have done a lot of reading (prior to being a gun owner). Based on what I have studied, the founding fathers knew they should form a central government, but were scared to death of creating something similar to what we just gained our independence from. They did not want to create a large, powerful overbearing central government. They wanted "for the people, by the people". That's the reason they allowed the states to maintain some rights. It's why they created a system of checks and balances (legislative, judicial and executive) and setup elections. I also believe the 2A was put in there because they DID NOT want a large standing army that could "squash any type of citizen uprising". Hence the use of the term "militia". Their feeling was IMO that if we needed an army, we'd call citizens to arms (with their own). 

At the same time, I believe that the 2A was also put in as another form of checks and balances. I think the founding fathers would be horrified that we have a large standing military that could be used against the population. The 2A was to allow the people to remain free and to allow them to keep the government from running amok should that happen by allowing them to be armed. Yes, we have elections, but what if the gov't ordered them suspended or ignored the results? What recoure would people have? As powerful and great as our military is, I believe that it (and our government) would want no part of trying to impose its will on 10s of millions of armed citizens, regardless of what they have in their arsenal. Check your history and see how large militarys have done (including ours) vs an insurgency. Look, you need a special license (Class III) to own an automatic weapon in this country and we're not allowed to own "rocket launchers". That's fine. But no one will allow this country to take away the right of the people to own long guns. Again, check history. Usually the next steps after disarming the people are not good ones.

On the "micro" level, the 2A is about protecting yourself. On the "macro" level, the 2A is about protecting this country from enemies foreign and domestic.

Sorry, I'm not following your logic but I'll answer your questions:
1) That's a tough one. Probably a hacker depending on what they got into (ex. power grid). However, 200 guys with weapons hitting Wall St., NASDAQ or a coordinated attack across 3 dozen malls or schools in this country could create enough fear and panic to bring the economy to it's knees.
2) Yes, the Founding Fathers may well be "horrified" at those developments, but I believe their fear would still be greater at the size and power of our standing military and the threat it could pose.
3) No idea what you mean by "You have to buy int the macro because without it your micro isn't valid".