I heard the 911 call of Mr. Horn. He had planned on shooting when they were at his neighbor’s house. The 911 operator convinced him not to shoot. From what I remember the robbers stepped on his property before he shot them dead. If I’m correct he obeyed the letter of the law. This will be interesting to watch.

Where I live not long after the concealed weapon’s law passed a story came out about a father that wanted to protect his daughter. This is when the make-my-day law passed that said that if someone entered your home and you felt threatened you had the right to use deadly force. A father lives a few doors down from his daughter. He saw thieves leaving her home. He jumped in his pickup, followed the thugs and shot toward their vehicle. One of them was hit. He was not charged.

People are sick of being in places where there are not enough police to respond in a timely manner. They have the right to protect themselves from those that want to harm them. HOWEVER the protection that the 2nd amendment deals with is protection from the government, not normal intruders.

I am glad you opened this post for comments. Having been a police officer for the last 22 years, I cannot imagine having to go about unarmed(even on my days off). It has come in handy a time or two, and it is a great feeling of security, particularly since my house was broken into twice this summer ( I interrupted the first one, but they got out the window before I caught sight of them, no doubt encouraged by my yelling out “Police” and drawing my gun upon entry and discovery).

As a life member (since I was 17) of the NRA, I have long been a proponent of the individual right to own firearms. Let’s hope the Supreme Court in its current makeup is wise enought to follow the intentions of the Founding Fathers.

More to the constitutional point, the first 10 amendments to the Constitution were put there as a protection of individual rights. There can be no doubt as to the original author’s intent. This rubrick over ‘well regulated militia’ as some type of qualifier of when or how citizens can bear arms is just that. It IS an individual right granted to us. I think we can use a little common sense to determine the difference between a twelve guage and a rocket launcher as to what constitutes bearing arms. The right to keep and bear arms was put there to allow us to protect ourselves in situations where the government couldn’t, or from the government itself if need be.

Above: Baghdad by night, from a piece at Attack MachineIngratitude at Thanksgiving. James Lewis at Am. Thinker. More on the Supremes and the DC gun ban. LaShawnRedefining "swift-boating," and re-writing history.The age-old dilemma: in a part…

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms. shall not be infringed”. Call me crazy, but this seems to be as self explanatory as it it can get. Explanatory to people who actually understand common sense that it is. Sorry liberals no offense.