Why Atty. Gen. Holder Is Opposed to American Citizens Having Guns

Atty. Gen. Holder says, "We have no right to possess guns". He is apparently referring to the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
   
Let's take a look at the Second Amendment. It says, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". Notice that it is a very short statement, which is very different than the 2000+ pages of Obama's health care bill. There are two possible reasons for having such a large document as the Health Care Bill. One is to discourage anyone from reading it, and the other is to be very explicit about every point possibly related to the subject.
    
Since the Second Amendment is a very short statement, it cannot be considered as a discouragement to anyone reading it, nor is it explicit on the many possible points related to it. However, it suffers by leaving open different interpretations, such as that of Atty. Gen. Holder and the National Rifle Association.
    
One way of deciding which of the various interpretations is correct is to look at the context of political conditions at the time the Second Amendment  was written.
    
Prior to 1776, the American colonists were British subjects. The Parliament in England had imposed a Stamp Tax in 1765 and the Tea Tax in 1773. Both taxes were very unpopular with the American colonists, and in 1775, a segment of the colonist society physically revolted against its British government. This was followed by a Declaration of Independence in 1776. The Declaration did not initially receive significant support from the colonists, but the war had already started in 1775. It continued until 1783. The war was protracted for eight years, because the British had difficulty with a long supply line to America, while the colonists had insufficient weapons.
    
After the British conceded victory to the colonists, a new American government was set up through the Constitution of 1787, which was four years after the close of the war. The Bill of Rights, of which the Second Amendment is a part, was established in 1791, eight years after the war.
    
The question is what was in the collective mind of the American leaders in 1791, eight years after a very difficult war. People do not generally forget major events that have affected their lives, even over an extended lifetime. There is no doubt that the citizens of the newly established nation and its leaders clearly remembered the difficulties they had in defeating the British. They knew that one of their major problems was insufficient arms. They also knew that government could become onerous to its citizens and that there might be occasions where revolt would be necessary, even in cases where government was controlling from a near geographical position, as opposed to across an ocean.
    
There's little doubt that our forefathers wanted to have us retain firearms in order to protect ourselves from an overreaching government or from a foreign force which local government is unable to repel.
    
The leaders of our present government and its successors obviously do not like the threat of citizen military action against them. As a means to minimize that threat, they naturally oppose citizens having firearms.
    
It behooves citizens to be sure that no regulations are passed and enforced which would eliminate their control of firearms.