First -- I am aware of and disagree with the current Supreme Court interpretation of the words of the Second Amendment. I believe the matter of gun ownership is clearly a community right according to the original constitutional language, not a right guaranteed to individuals. ("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") I attribute this to a highly politicized and dogmatic interpretation of a current majority of the Supreme Court. In many ways this is similar to the Supreme Court misinterpretation of the equality before the law provisions of the Constitution, which for six or seven decades interpreted segregated schools as "separate but equal", based on a majority of justices’ cultural and racist predilections. It is also similar to my strong disagreement about the Supreme Court interpretation of the freedom of speech being equivalent to the spending of money to influence elections based on a 1976 decision. Second -- my problem isn't with “law abiding citizens”, but with the evidence that suggests that 5 of 7 murders are committed by individuals who knew their victims or were relatives. As well as, evidence that, the unintentional firearm injury/ death rates among children ages 14 and under in the United States is nine times higher than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. My bet is that those 25 countries have effective regulations on gun ownership and accessibility. In other words most gun violence is enabled by the easy availability and accessibility and deadly consequences of guns. At times when passion displaces reason in fights, and when immaturity and curiosity is more important than understanding the consequences of gun use in young children, handy firearms have very negative consequences. Therefore, I support reasonable regulation of gun ownership. I believe that passion is more likely to prevail than reason in circumstances and areas where desperation, depression, and powerlessness in a significant percentage of our population is enhanced by poverty, unemployment, inadequate education, poor health and lack of insurance. I find gun restriction in Chicago and Washington DC reasonable. And it is reasonable wherever poverty and unemployment are present and concentrated. Careful and exhaustive investigative procedures are justifiable in both the purchasing and licensing of firearms. I believe that organizations which fight such reasonable regulation are destroying their legitimacy and effectiveness.
Source: Citizens Count Issue Survey 2012