you might want to think about taking up fishing.

“Well regulated”.

The bullet lands at the point of aim at a certain yardage.

ETA: Still doesn't define "deer hunting". No answer to initial query. Fail.

been regulated enough to deter George Washington from upholding the Constitution as it was written about not long before.

Shay's helped lead to the current constitution. Having a stronger central government rather than a weaker one, allowing it to have more control over State's policies, like over lending practices. I'm a little confused by your post.

any organized or unorganized militia.
So what’s the deal? You all for nut cases like this current gun nut having the right to his weapon of choice. Don’t think you’ll find much sympathy here.

The current "gun nut", as you say, spent time in a military hospital for mental problems. A measly 2 weeks. Like wanting to shoot up his base. However, the Army didn't see fit to notify local LEO of this, to get him entered into the NICS database. LIKE THE LAW ALLOWS!!! If only the current laws were enforced, perhaps we wouldn't have a need to call for new ones. Wait, laws not being obeyed, so we need new ones? Makes very little sense, doesn't it. All those drunk drivers, let's ban alcohol, too, while we're at it. It's for the children, after all, and if it saves one life...

ETA; And, to your initial question, yes they can. Was it the right thing to do? Had grievances been filed, and ignored? If we CAN do a thing, SHOULD we do it??? (Research shows that most of the rebels were not prosecuted, and/or pardoned, including Shay himself. What does that say about the Gov't crackdown?)

Test for all purchases of firearms. That’d be a great start.

The last shooter should have been reported to NICS. Shouldn't have been allowed to purchase a firearm anyway. THAT would be a great start.

I'm so happy we live in the country. My friends in the neighborhood all agreed. We are in a tiny "safe" bubble.

It deserves to be read far and wide.

Involve handguns. There nothing wrong with an individual owining semiautomatic rifles. There’s millions and millions in circulation, and you point to a few hundred incidents over 50 years.

But if there are the votes to ban them, and the Supreme Court agrees, then have at it.

Actually, I don't think that's true. We once allowed fully automatic machine guns to be mail-ordered and delivered to homes without even a background check.

So if you think your statement is true about AR15s, then you must think that full-automatic weapons were less lethal. Are you ok with making these less-lethal weapons more available again?

Or is your claim in the OP incorrect?

is less lethal than an AR15. The Tommy gun fired a .45 cal bullet with a muzzle velocity of about 900 fps. The AR fires .223 at 3000 fps. The difference in ballistic behavior is what makes the AR more lethal. The .45 bullet will normally pass through or embed in the human body. The .223 will vaporize water in the body causing a shock wave that magnifies the damage and then it 'tumbles' so that a shoulder wound may have a lower back exit wound. This is why the kill rate in mass shootings is 2.7 times higher for ARs than for other weapons used in mass shootings. Ask the surgeons that treat such wounds.

Dr. Jeremy Cannon, a trauma surgeon at Penn Presbyterian Medical Center in Philadelphia, served in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

They tend to explode bones, too. Ask any civil war doctor how many amputations he had to do.

Since you don't think the .45 ACP is nearly as lethal as 5.56, how about 7.62 NATO? Here's some numbers to crunch: 20 rd standard magazine, 147 gr FMJBT bullet, approx. 2700 FPS. I'd say that one is a bit more lethal. Will have the same target effect as the 5.56, with more penetration. (Don't know why, but every VN vet I've talked to that had a choice, kept the M-14. Maybe that should tell us something...)

You're gonna be accused of "Gun-spaining" or some such.

Can't let the facts get in the way of a good gun banner argument.