I will say that in this day and age of F-16s, F-22s and other powerful fighter aircraft, not to mention the use of drones and Eric Holder's rationalizations that they can be used against American citizens at any time, for whatever reason, that we have gone way past the point where an armed citizenry can ever possibly hope to overthrow a tyrannical government. I'm sure that what the Founding Fathers intended with the 2nd Amendment use against tyranny held true for a number of years, but I think it's extremely misguided to try to say that having unfettered access to guns is going to protect the populace from governmental overreach.

Where we both agree is that an amount of training is necessary for proper and safe handling of firearms. But too often we see the mishandling of guns resulting in deaths and injuries, and yet you still insist that training should only be voluntary for the people who want it. With rights come responsibilities and there are way too many irresponsible people out there with guns for the rest of us to feel like we are protected in any way. I don't see how it can be so cut and dried to you that everyone should have guns until they prove they shouldn't. If you are going to make exceptions for gun ownership on certain crimes, then you believe in some form of gun controls on ownership and operation. I'd certainly feel a lot safer about all the guns in circulation if I knew that every single one of them was accounted for by way of sales, and that every single person who owned a gun was professionally trained in its use and safety.

There are a couple of recent cases just in the last few days where I would argue the people involved should not have guns, and that we should make every possible effort to deter people like these from owning them, before they get their hands on them. These are not responsible gun owners, and this is why I support restrictions on sales, and mandatory training.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57576310/road-rage-video-leads-to-n.c-couples-arrest/

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/26/17470862-father-cleaning-shotgun-shoots-10-year-old-son-in-the-head-in-nc?lite

If you think it would help you better understand my reasoning, I could link you to the dozens of gun owners every day who are either injured or killed while mishandling their weapons. Obviously you say this is an acceptable price to pay, but I would argue that it is similar to putting innocent people to death: the more innocents that die, the less authoritative your position becomes, and the more reason to revisit the laws and do something about the innocent loss of life. People need to be responsible gun owners, and your method of control does not lend itself to people taking responsibility for their use and operation. Until such time as everyone who owns a gun can prove they are responsible for its safe keeping, then we need laws restricting ownership and sales.

There was a study by the CDC in the 1990s which stated that over the course of a lifetime, the cost to taxpayers of gun related deaths and injuries will cost us $2.3 billion. And this was just from the people shot in 1994. This is a terrible, terrible price to pay for what you want to see, regardless of the loss of life and livelihood. And as a political aside, I will point out that this study done in the 1990s was one of the last of its kind before the Tiahrt amendment prevented the collection of such data for purposes of possibly affecting future gun legislation.

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5002a1.htm

There was also a case in the last couple of days in Toledo of a guy who was stalking his ex-girlfriend and shot her dead after harassing her for months, even after she got a restraining order, and even after he violated that restraining order. Somehow he was still able to possess a gun and used it to chase her down and kill her. These are the people you are defending when you say there should be open and unlimited access to guns for everyone, and these are the people that I would like to see prevented from owning them by any means necessary.

http://www.toledoblade.com/Police-Fire/2013/03/25/Toledoan-killed-by-ex-boyfriend.html

I would also like to add, as an addition to the previous article, that I would like to see the NRA put up their lobbying of Congress and devote their gun sales kickbacks to push for better funding of mental health initiatives and suicide prevention lines. I see our biggest obstacle to reducing gun violence in the way we take care of the poor and mentally ill. When you have no job, no healthcare, and no prospect of making your life any better, it tends to manifest itself in violent ways. If we are lucky, there will only be jail time involved. In far too many cases, people end up shot to death precisely because it's so easy to get a gun.

so, with all that said, can you support any of what I have said above in regards to gun ownership and why I see it as a societal problem?