The Second Amendment Blues

There was a phone-in show on public radio this morning whose main topic was the shooting spree in Colorado by some lunatic who killed or injured something like 70 people in a movie theater. The news reports inexplicably refer to him as “the alleged killer” in spite of the unanimous agreement of living victims, first responders, police, and the fact that he was the only one present with an assault rifle, a shotgun and two handguns. But I am wandering from individual to national lunacy.
The aspect of this sorry affair being scrutinized by guests and callers was “Should we consider regulating guns?” The answer to this difficult question was mulled over by both knee-jerk liberals and freedom-loving conservatives. The former group apologetically suggested that perhaps more care should be taken to prevent assault rifles falling into the hands of known felons, convicted terrorists, and the criminally insane; that, if it isn't too much trouble, maybe purchases of more than a truckload of ammunition and high explosives should be reported to somebody.
This outrageous assault on our personal liberties was stoutly opposed by the conservative side. As one patriot pointed out with some asperity, guns are all around us – making a few more restrictive laws won't make it any safer. Furthermore, he explained, these shooting are a rare occurrence and bound to happen anyway in schools and movie theaters and such since places like this are magnets for violent acts of this sort, and if nut jobs like James Holmes didn't have access to machine guns, well he would have used Molotov Cocktails instead, and just think of the mess that would have made.
At that point I really wished my radio had an instant replay feature so that I could confirm that an actual full-grown human being of presumably average intelligence had really said this.
The conversation then strayed into the area of whether it was wise to allow, not to say encourage, a demonstrably violent, trigger-happy population to carry concealed weapons. I wondered it the Patriot would voice the opinion of another Concerned Conservative that we should all not only be allowed, but required, to carry a firearm at all times. Happily he didn't, but he did argue that if more people carried a Glock, then random shooters would be much less likely to run amok in malls since they would be mowed down by vigilantes before the body count rose past five or six.
Somebody then pointed out that in situations like this, typically the damage caused by the crossfire is greater than whatever was likely without amateur intervention.
We then moved on to the patriotic importance of the Second Amendment, during which debate nobody thought to mention that Thomas Jefferson had never heard of an Uzi.
This entire horrifying exchange took place on National Public Radio, that bastion of liberal thought hated and vilified by the Real Conservative Patriots, those stout-hearted protectors of our Rights and Liberties, or at least the rights and liberties of rich, white, christian, men. I have not sought out any Fox News channels or radio stations that favor Rush Limbaugh, but I am struggling to imagine how a similar conversation might unfold on one of these venues. Would they opine that the mop-headed boy left anyone alive? Would they be outraged that the police had overstepped their authority by arresting an American citizen for simply exercising his second amendment rights? Would they be scornful that not one of the 70 victims shot back?
I'm not sure I want to know, but now I am giving some thought to what model of handgun would go best with my Birkenstocks.