The Second Amendment has been misinterpreted. It says guns are permitted to a "well-regulated militia." That means trained citizen soldiers called into action for emergencies — because in colonial times every able-bodied man was required to be a member of the militia. It does not mean everyone with $50 and a driver's license is entitled to own a gun.
 
Wrong. Title 10 USC, Ch 13, Sec 311.

It would help if you actually understood what you were talking about before opening your ignorant yap.
 
Oh, you might also want to tell the Federal Government of this profound revelation you had.  Apparently, in the National Defense Act of 1916, they created the Civilian Marskmanship Program http://thecmp.org/cmp_sales/ for the purpose of selling SURPLUS BATTLE RIFLES to civilians for the purpose of ensuring they're trained in case of war...as members of the militia.

Every legal opinion for 200 years denied individual gun ownership was a right 

Cite, please.  You won't find any relevant (SCOTUS) rulings to that effect.  You're repeating bleats from Brady, et al, that are unsupported.
 
And even if so, so what?  For a long time, it was held legal for states to have official religions, ban pornography, and ban gays from marrying or even interacting. This isn't the 1790s.  Unless you want to go back to black people being slaves. (You probably do.)
 
— until the steady lobbying of the National Rifle Association created a climate that allowed a conservative U.S. Supreme Court in 2008 to strike down a handgun ban in the District of Columbia, and fuel the sense of entitlement of gun owners.
 
The same "conservative" court that upheld Roe v Wade and 0bamacare? Seek therapy, dude. You're paranoid and delusional.
 
You can't prevent mental illness. You can prevent humans from having easy access to tools they can use to harm other people.
 
Yes, that's worked so well in the UK that in 100 years has gone from similar gun laws to the US and 1/12 the murder rate, to very restrictive laws and better than 1/2 the murder rate.
 
Fun fact:  I don't need a gun to club your brains into goo.
 
But if you're obsessed with guns, you'd say something like:
 
 
Among the 24 most affluent nations of the world, the U.S. is the far and away leader in gun homicides. None of the other 23 affluent nations has a rate above 1 firearm death per 100,000 population.
 
Because somehow gun deaths are worse than drunk driving deaths?
 
One of us has an unhealthy obsession with guns.  It isn't me.
 
I'm talking about repealing or amending the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
 
Sometime about the fifth grade, most of us learned that that process involves both Houses of Congress, and approval of 3/4 of the states.  If you think that is ever going to happen, you need to put down the medical marijuana.
 
The idea of 500 students in a college library or a dozen teachers in an elementary school pulling out guns to shoot a gunman is ludicrous. They would wind up shooting each other.
 
And yet in places where this is legal, this has not happened.  Where in your professional firearms training did you learn this?  You DO have professional training in this field you're masturbating about, right?  Right?
 
Gun freaks say if you take away their guns only outlaws will have guns. That's a chance worth taking. Because if we ban guns, eventually the tide will turn. It might take 10 years or 20 years. Hell, it might take 50 years. But if we make it illegal to own a handgun, eventually there will be no handguns.
 
I have functional guns from 1872 in my collection.  In the UK, criminals convert dummy and airsoft guns to fire bullets.  Once again, the gun freak (you), opens his ignorant yap about a subject without doing the faintest modicum of research. That's probably why you're in "reporting," the Special Olympics of writing. Real writers have to do research.
 
Let the hunters keep their rifles and shotguns; those weapons are ineffective tools in a mass shooting.

BWUAHAHAHAAHA!  You went full retard.  Never go full retard.
 
Your typical deer rifle has 3 times the muzzle energy of an "assault weapon" (please define what that is for me.  Go ahead) and about 10 times that of a handgun. But they're "ineffective."  Because nothing that can kill a bull elk could be useful for killing people.
 
This is an uphill battle. Despite daily front-page stories of shooting sprees and killings, Americans don't want to give up their guns. Over the past 10 years, the percentage of Americans who support stricter guns laws has dropped from 60 percent to 47 percent. In a recent survey, 73 percent of Americans oppose banning handguns.
 
Yup. You're kinda on the same page as the homophobes and abortion banners.  And the Klan.
 
We're coming for your guns. And someday, we'll take them.
 
Fascinating. So, if I have a gun, and you do not, how precisely do you propose to take it?
 
Oh, one more thing--300 million guns, average value of $500 each. Per that pesky 5th Amendment (which you should have learned about in fifth grade), you have pay for the private property you seize for public purposes.  Now, you'll be buying me a new house, given my collection, but more importantly, you'll be ponying up $150 BILLION dollars or more.  Good luck with that.  

Perhaps you should have studied 5th grade arithmetic, too, if you didn't want to look stupid.
 
Bleat harder, you whining little coward.  You're going to shit your panties on the internet, and that's all.
 
Please continue.  Your dickless rage amuses me.
 
Stop the insanity.  Put this paranoid, delusional, ignorant retard into a home.