I hadn't noticed a constitutional provision or amendment protecting the right to own and possess race horses.

>>>If Second Amendment absolutists keep standing up and daring others to pry their guns from their "cold, dead fingers," eventually somebody's going to do it.

Maybe.

But those "somebodies" will have to bring guns to do it.

That'd be a fine howdy-do...

>>>If Second Amendment absolutists keep standing up and daring others to pry their guns from their "cold, dead fingers," eventually somebody's going to do it."

But probably not the first somebodies, and maybe not the second or third set of somebodies.

The dumb bastard doesn't notice that the dare he implies exists is only valid as a dare when those somebodies first defy the constitution and thereby become criminals, regardless of uniform or state sanctioning of their actions.

Nobody thinks it wrong to warn that shoplifters will be prosecuted. Why? Because the warning is predicated on the initiation of a criminal act by the potential prosecutee. Same for those who would "pry" firearms, they must first commit a criminal act, so warning them of consequences is not a dare, it is fair warning.