Not even a month has gone by and already Senator Boxer has announced that she plans to attack the freedoms of law abiding American citizens by introducing legislation that would make it illegal to bear arms without a special permission slip from the Feds. What part of "shall not infringe" does she not understand? What part of "Keep and BEAR arms" is unintelligible? The Second Amendment doesn't say anything about requiring a special piece of paper wrapped in plastic. The 2nd Amendment is my Permit. Period.
The dirt-bag terrorist who attacked innocent victims in Arizona last month broke the law when he filled out his background check form with lies stating he had never used any illegal drugs. He broke the law when he used the illegal drugs in the first place. He obviously broke the law when he started shooting innocent victims. Having one more broken law on the books would not have stopped him any more than what the existing draconian gun laws in New York City have done for the skyrocketing violent crime in New York City.
The only thing that can stop an armed terrorist dirt-bag is an armed potential victim - I say potential victim because an armed potential victim also has the potential of defending himself (or herself), quite the opposite of an unarmed defenseless victim. Infringing the rights of law abiding citizens with new pointless laws in the hope of stopping crazy people from doing crazy things is wishful thinking at best, and complete idiocy at worst. My vote is for the latter of the two.