IMHO, that is another non-issue, or a minor social problem blown into a war of symbols.
Guns as physical objects have two major functions:
1. they are tools of trade for the military, the law enforcement, and professional criminals, and
2. they are recreational toys and collector item for everyone else - like all terrain vehicles, jet-skis, antiques, etc.
As far as the tool of trade is concerned, the reasonable debate may include the use of certain weapons by the military (such as depleted uranium) or the policy of using fire arms by law enforcement officers. I do not think that any reasonable person woul defened the "right" to use firearms in the commission of a crime.
As far as the recreational use is concerned, the reasonable debate may include safety issue as well as hunting - many people may find killing live animals for pleause reprehensible, but that is a cruelty-to-animals rather than the 2nd amendment issue. So the cruelty to animals issue aside, no rational person would object to ownersip of guns for recreational purposes (such as target shooting or collector items).
Unfortunately, guns are also imbued with a lots of symbolic meanining, much more so than most other physical objects, as especially in the US. The symbolic meaning of firearms in the US culture goes well beyond their actual functionality as tools of trade or recreation items. In fact firearms, are often seen as fetishes endowed with special powers, such as the power to:
- liberate from oppression - provide personal security and peace of mind - guarantee the existing social order - bring about the ideal social order - epitomize male sexual prowess - epitomize ultimate control of other people and their behavior
Because of these fetishistic symbolic meanings, gund have become an item of a major symbolic value in the culture wars. Those forces who highly value the symbolic traits represented by the gun culture - staunchly defend the right to bear arms, whereas those who oppose those symbolic traits - also oppose that right. But what is really at stakes here is not just the 2nd amendment, which per se is of minor importance in any modern society, but the debate over the "values" - the frontier machismo versus urban civility.
This is very similar to, say, to the abortion debate - which is not about the medical procedure per se, but about the position of women in society and control of female sexuality.
As I understand it, many lefties find the frontier macho culture reprehensible, hence their opposition to guns as the prime fetishes of that culture. But that attitude is mainly redefinig the meaning of the fetish (from positive to negative) rather than moving away from fetishistic approach to society altogether. The right to bear arms is a marginal issue from a left's point of view: guns will bring neither salvation nor chaos to this society, so debating their legality is a waste of time and a diversion from the real social problem - the distribution of wealth.
wojtek
PS. As I see it, most US-ers are really fucked up about the three F's: firearms, faith, and individual freedom. It is almost impossible to have a rational discussion on any topics involving one of those three Fs.