The 2nd Amendment shall not be infringed upon

Going by the fact that you sourced CNN (The same biased news network who are exploiting the kids of a school shooting to further their agenda), it comes as no surprise to me that you would claim that the NRA runs the country as if the government itself were its puppet. Before I initiate my rebuttal, I should like to mention that the revenue of the NRA in 2016 (On the assumption that it was relatively similar to 2017) was approximately $433.9 million (http://www.guns.com...), not $36 billion. I couldn't imagine where you found such a ludicrous number. In order to answer the question regarding the legitimacy of the 2nd Amendment, we must understand the contextual information surrounding the reasons for why our founding fathers implemented the 2nd Amendment into the constitution in 1791. The reasons for why we were granted the right to bear arms was to protect ourselves against an external or internal tyrannical government, bent on the authoritative-like control of our people. If you have noticed, all clauses within the constitution serve the single purpose of limiting the power of the government, whether it be the 1st Amendment, which prohibits any law that restricts the freedom of press, speech or peaceful protest, or the 3rd or 4th Amendment, which prohibits quartering or house searches without a warrant for arrest. The 2nd Amendment is no exception. The Amendment itself is not as much the right to bear arms as it is the right for us to protect ourselves against any form of institutional oppression. This is unfortunately often ignored by many mainstream outlets and sources of information, and the majority of people don't understand this concept. As for your second argument. To say that the 2nd Amendment is not relevant today because it was written "300 years" ago is an unfortunate statement to make. I recall in the last century alone containing multiple oppressive regimes that brought their countries into war and deprived their own citizens of their rights. I recall Italy, Japan, Spain and Germany undergoing fascist regimes, I recall the Soviet Union spanning a life of 80 years, installing terror on its own citizens and imprisoning and systematically starving over 40 million of its own people. China serves as a similar case, under the totalitarian regime of Mao, which led to great famines, persecutions and the death of another 40 million people. I can assure you, every government that attempts to take over the rights of its own people will be completely deterred from a population that was granted the ability to protect itself against such a tyrannical regime. One might make the gross assumption that the United States could never turn authoritarian, while completely ignoring the blatant fact that the government today has more control over its people than it did in the 19th century, and that the role of government has far outreached the role intended by the Founding Fathers. I say we cannot predict the future, and neither could the founding fathers, which is why they tried to limit the role of government in every way they saw fit. It only takes 1 great recession for an authoritarian leader to rise into power, or any sort of sudden political shift in ideology. So understand that the United States was not limited to "The wild west", but rather a country with a government elected by its people, of its people and for its people. Speaking of school shootings, let's completely ignore the fact that 98% of mass shootings occur in Gun free zones. It's somewhat humorous (Rather facetious of me to say it in this manner) that you would list countless of shootings that took place in either gun free zones (Orlando and Florida shooting) or where the arms themselves were illegally purchased. I would like to reiterate that gun bans and fines simply do not prevent criminals from obtaining weapons. Dylan (During the Columbine massacre) obtained his TEC-DC9 illegally considering Bill Clinton's gun reform ban was already emplaced (http://acolumbinesite.com...). It's also quite convenient that you leave out the Sutherland Springs church shooting, The recent Youtube shooting and the Parkland high school shooting as they do not necessarily fit your argument. You claim that the police have situations under control for the most part, yet you neglect to remember the fact that the police were issued 44 warnings from teachers, parents and students regarding the behavior of Nikolas Cruz before he committed the crime. Furthermore, there were 4 police men present outside the schools unwilling to go inside the school during the mass shooting, demonstrating another failure of the police force. How about the Sutherland Spring Shooting, which saw the standoff between a legally armed citizen who chased the shooter (Who obtained his gun illegally) away and saved countless lives before the police even were aware of what was happening. The police failed in both these circumstances. It is estimated that gun carriers tend to be 8% more reliable in life threatening situations than police. If you were to outlaw guns, not only would you be taking away people's rights to protect themselves against a tyrannical government, but you would encourage a black market of guns to form, with illegal gun owners buying from them. Take the drug war for example, when Richard Nixon outlawed the possession and use of drugs. Did that work? There are more guns in the United States than people, with over 40,000,000 carriers of fire arms. Good luck trying to take their rights away from them without causing a civil war that would kill well over millions. In 2016, there were 33,636 gun related deaths in the United States. That's 0.0000925% of the US population each year. 65% of those gun related deaths are by suicide, which would not be prevented by any gun law. 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and tend to be justified. 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related crime and 3% are accidental discharge deaths. Of the 33,636 number, roughly 5,100 are homicide related deaths (most of which are in self-defense). Within the United States: - 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago - 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore - 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit - 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington DC (54% increase over prior years) That means 25% of all gun related homicides in the United States occur in 4 cities. All 4 of those cities are democratically run and contain strict gun laws. The number of gun related deaths is not so blown up to proportion. Especially considering 500,000 - 3,000,000 lives are saved with guns according to the 'Institute of Medicine and National Research Council of the National Academies.' They quote: "All National survey estimates indicate that defensive use by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million. Finally, although the United States have a gun problem, they're gun problem is not nearly as bad as the amount of shootings that takes place in other countries upon taking into account population size. In terms of Mass shootings per 100,000 people, the United States is 11th with (0.089), behind Norway, Serbia, France, Macedonia, Albania, Slovakia, Switzerland, Finland, Belgium and Czech Republic. (https://crimeresearch.org...) In terms of Homicides by guns, The United States is 16th with (4.62) behind Honduras, Venezuela, Swaziland, Jamaica, Guatemala, El Salvador, Brazil, Colombia, Panama, Philippines, South Africa, Mexico, Paraguay, Costa Rica and Uruguay. (https://en.wikipedia.org...) To conclude, Banning guns and fining ownerships of guns only forbids law abiding citizens from obtaining said guns. Much appreciation for calling me a hillbilly though. Appreciate it