Pro-RKBA liberals?

[Handy]

You must not have known that many Soviet citizens did have guns, and military service offered access to even more. It was immaterial.


What you are also missing about state sponsored religion is that by using public funds (your money) the government is sponsoring a particular faith on your behalf, and in so doing negatively affecting the influence of the religions they do not sponsor.

Don't confuse "state" with "government". We are the state and the government is the administration that runs the state for us. The government is not empowered to advocate for any religion because the state is granted no power to hurt or help specific faiths. Since there is no factor that is universal to all belief systems (including atheism), there can be no equitable way for the state to sponsor all faiths equally.

 

[Hal]

What you seem to be trying to say here is that back then there were just as many nuts and cults and convicted felons, and that your chances of encountering them was as good as it is now.

That's exactly what I'm saying. ( as a ratio of course - not as a total number figure)
Read you history of life in colonial America from 1700 through 1800.

And that they should, unless incarcerated, have unrestricted access to guns.

In a 2nd amendment nutshell - yes.
Bear in mind the 2nd is not about personal defence against criminals.
It addresses the .gov's ability to restrict the "common man" from having the meas to forcibly overthrow a corrupt or tyrannical government.

You brought up the 1950's also.
In the 1950's there were no federal restrictions concerning firearms and felons.
That restriction came about in 1968 w/the GCA of '68.