stupid . . .
I give as much respect as I get, CL.
Look, I don't espouse a radical position. I support the individual RKBA arms as articulated by Justice Scalia in Heller. But I reject the ridiculous notion that the purpose of the RKBA is so we can foment revolution and shoot at public servants.
There is no more King George. The government of our representative Republic can be turned away at the ballot box, not with your collection of guns.
But go ahead and collect the guns you want. I understand the collecting impulse. For me it's jazz records. If for you happiness is a warm gun, then solid.
Licensure, registration and insurance is a perfectly reasonable position. The parallel with cars isn't exact, but it's close enough to put the lie to accusations that such measures keep ordinary folks from owning guns, buying and selling guns, or suffering the confiscation of their guns.
I oppose the Dems' idiocy about self-serving, ineffective crapola like gun bans and onerous requirements that effectively deny the individual right guaranteed by Heller. You and I are on the same page in opposing the anti-gun schemes of the Dems. But state laws that require drivers to be licensed, and cars to be registered to their owners and properly insured when used for their intended purpose, aren't "anti-car" - they are merely the means by which the community addresses the trade-off between the inherent benefits and dangers of cars. Similar measures make perfect sense in the context of firearms, and - if reasonable - are entirely compatible with the individual RKBA.