I personally think we could do better than Charlton Heston as a spokesperson. He is out of touch with the rank and file. If you read the constitution as it is written it says, " the right to bear arms shall not be infringed". Doesn't get any plainer than that does it? It doesn't specify size or type ( I don't believe our forefathers invisioned automatic weapons and the like, but we work with what we have ), that has become a statutory question which is open to political influences. As I said, I am all for restricting the sale/importing of fully automatic weapons ( smaller concealable types too) and their magazines. Those laws are already in place with about 300 others that don't get enforced. So the answer, let's make another unenforceable law and hire 10,000 new bureuacrats to monitor it and issue studies at the cost of 10 million per study that tell us what we already know besides raising our taxes. Okay. That is always the answer from the left of center. I can see no value of trying to outlaw something that about half the population owns, they tried once before, prohibition, and it failed as well. It would be cost prohibitive. Why don't we try to outlaw cars? 50 times more people are killed every year with a vehicle of some sort let's outlaw cars and everybody ride the bus. D.W.I. is against the law and people die everyday because some jackass thinks he can hold his liquor when leaving the sports bar. Oh no outlaw sports.