In the wake of the Aurora tragedy, there is lots of debate going on about the Second Amendment. Two things keep coming to mind:
Most of current discourse is polarized and vitriolic in nature, but I don't believe this is really strictly a binary debate. I am a hunter and a gun owner, yet there is very little about the "pro-gun" lobby that resonates with me. I have been in favor of reinstating the Assault Weapons Ban since it expired in 2004. I have lived in countries that require registration of personal firearms. I have no problem with this practice.
Another deeper question that I can't seem to shake:
Is the Constitution really a sacred document, inerrant and infallible?
I would argue that it was written within a particular historical context by men (and only men) with their own vices, biases, and proclivities. Certainly I enjoy many of the freedoms that it guarantees (and I don’t mean to diminish that), and I agree with many, if not all, of its principles, but I am not convinced of the document’s infallibility as a whole.