Last week's guest column by Sid Bekowich, "Guns, the Constitution and the people," is correct ... to a point.
Yes, the Second Amendment does say "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed," but preceding that part is, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state."
In fact reading the arguments of the founders and full context (from Wikipedia on the Ratification debates) "the Constitutional delegates altered the language of the Second Amendment several times to emphasize the military context of the amendment." From this, home use and gun types have been continually challenged to the Supreme Court with each ending that Congress can, in fact, limit exactly who (no felons) and what type (no machine guns still stands) can be legitimately prohibited.
This is a volatile subject, but surely with the fact that more than 11,000 are killed annually with guns by people in these United States, taking another look at who and what type should be on the table.
"Who" is better handled if every transaction requires a background check. "What type" for non-military should not include strictly military-type weapons to my thinking, and I, for one, just don't think any citizen or group of citizens can really take on the Pentagon making it unnecessary for citizens to have assault rifles or magazines holding more than seven (OK, up to 10) rounds.