Since Rob bumped this thread, I'll add my two cents. The arguement about hunting for food is still a viable one in many areas. It is cheaper to hunt and the food gathered from that does last a long time. Now, most of the "Big City" posters here won't really see the point in that, but in the more rural areas, especially the very low income ones, it's still a necessity. It can also be said that guns are needed for protection in the same areas where law enforcement is either too far away or too inept and/or corrupt to perform it's job in time or properly.
Rob, though you think your car example is well thought out and explained, it's not. Have you seen how many crazy fuckers there are on the road? I've wondered many times how they even got licenses in the first place. And I do believe car accidents kill more people per year than guns (though I may be wrong. Someone come up with the stats.).
The reason of the amendment back in the olden days is to protect the citizens from corrupt government. There wasn't a true military back then, so it was the people who would make up the battalions if the need once again arose. Though there is now a military, there is still the need of protection (lord knows when this thing is going to go down the shitter) as well as producing food and such. Though I don't need an uzi to take out Bambi.
