It would seem, on the face of it, that the Supremes actually do buy into the "well regulated" part of the second amendment and has not ruled against any actual gun regulations, other than those that might deny a citizen the supposed right to own a weapon unless there is reason, such as insanity, a history of violence, etc. It also means that when gov tries to 'regulate' they are well within their right and all the talk about ignoring the second amendment, taking away rights, etc. is just pure unadulterated blather and should be treated as suck.
This morning I watched some of the gun blather on the political shows and it was truly disgusting. All these arguments over the second amendment! NOBODY has suggested taking away a right to bear arms - NOBODY! Its all fear crap coming from the gun manufacturer and repeated by the greedy brain dead intent on getting theirs from the gun manufacturers. I do, however, wonder about the gun manufacturers themselves. They gave something like 33 million to the Lying Jackass and, it would seem, compliant legislators get something between 3 and 6 million each to keep their jobs too. I wonder, just how much profit do these people make? On the face of it they seem to be giving away at least, easily, more than 100 million dollars annually. This is not money raised by due paying NRA members (if you buy a gun you are registered as a member of the NRA and if you choose to not pay your dues you are still a member and will have been sent a card to prove it!). Anyway, on top of that the NRA spends more millions training and 'educating'. Again, how much money do these people make? I think the Remington gun manufacturer, for instance, just went banko! Consider how much money they would have if they weren't giving 100+ million away every year! My suspicion, based on absolutely nothing, tends to make me wonder why they are actually doing what they are doing as it would seem that is actually cutting into their profit!
Perhaps the Dems should press to make sure that claimed NRA membership includes only dues paying members and not those who are claimed to be members simply because they bought a gun. That might be a really good place to start against all these claims? I also think that those who are paying dues should be made aware that they needn't as they would still be a member whether they liked it or not. Again, I suspect that many paying in might be interested to know that they don't need to.