MaronFan
Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
So many San Diegans carry guns
As the state militias were eventually nationalized into what we now call the National Guard, one can argue strictly following the 2nd Amendment would mean that citizens in National Guard may have weapons. The 2nd amendment doesn't say every citizen can have a firearm. Gun ownership is qualified by membership into a well regulated militia. It does not mention self-defense or hunting. A better argument for bearing arms might be seen in state laws allowing firearms for hundreds of years. Past practice. Though some may or may not like that argument. It seems better than the 2nd amendment argument as there is no militia requirement involved. A side note on Obama. Obama is not after your guns. He wants gun owners on his side. He wants to try to triangulate and appease as many people as he can except real liberals. He takes them for granted. Or ignores us liberals. Some he has ignored at his peril: Paul Krugman, Robert Reich, and other economy savvy liberals. Obama picked people who helped cause this financial mess, like Geithner. Why? Obama is a centrist, coroporate friendly Democrat, not a progressive. His cadinet are centrists. He wants everyone to like him. He wants Republican votes. Altruistically, Obama wants you to have health care. All of us. That is what he wants to do. Not take your guns. Stimulus, health care, and better foreign policy. Those are his goals, not guns...— July 17, 2009 11:26 p.m.
So many San Diegans carry guns
The 2nd Amendment is usually discussed as the "right to bear arms.' According to the amendment, however, these bearing of arms out of the necessity for citizens to be part of a militia "being necessary to the security of a free State. The 2nd Amendment Reads: 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. What is the meaning of "well regulated militia" The term "well regulated" in the Second Amendment has been interpreted as a usage of the term "regulated" to mean "disciplined" or "trained".[105] On what constitutes a well regulated militia, Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 29: If a well regulated militia be the most natural defence of a free country, it ought certainly to be under the regulation and at the disposal of that body which is constituted the guardian of the national security....A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss.[39] Some scholars, such as Saul Cornell, have contended that modern militia movements are not what could be considered "well regulated", since they often lack fixed leadership and may have unstructured training regimes.[106]— July 17, 2009 11:04 p.m.