Today State Sen. Lee Zeldin released a statement on the upcoming vote in Albany to tighten gun control laws in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre.
Though Zeldin will not be present to cast his vote, he indicated in his statement that he is philosophically opposed to the measure, citing the origin and purpose of our 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.
"Its purpose was not so much about hunting as it was for a deeper and much more important consideration of our founding fathers," Zeldin stated, explaining that the amendment was intended to allow citizens to be properly armed should they need to rise up militarily against their own government.
Clearly Zeldin is reacting to the argument that one doesn't need an AK-47 to hunt deer or pheasant. One might need an AK-47, Zeldin seems to argue, to combat a tyrannical government and its obedient military forces.
Where do you stand on this issue? Should a line be drawn on the type of weapons citizens (law-abiding or otherwise) should have access to? Let us know in the comments section below.