It is for a growing number of hunters. Ironically, ever since Jim Zumbo infamously blogged that black guns have no place in hunting, their popularity among hunters has surged.

From the Twin Cities’ Pioneer Press:

"Last fall, we couldn't keep these rifles in stock," said [Joe’s Sporting Goods gunsmith Bob] Everson. . . ..

Whether Zumbo was treated fairly or not for his opinion is still debated, but what isn't disputed is the popularity of AR rifles. Big-name rifle makers like Remington and Ruger have jumped into the game of making AR rifles (named after the Armalite company that first developed them in the 1950s). . . .

Jim Rauscher, president of Joe's Sporting Goods, said bolt-action rifles are still the most popular style among his deer-hunting customers. But AR rifles appeal to certain segment of hunters. . . .

"There is the guy who still likes the four-door sedan," Rauscher said, "and there are the guys who like the large, jacked-up pickup trucks."

So how about you? Can you see yourself hunting deer with an AR?

In case you were living under a rock last year, in the landmark District of Columbia v. Heller case, the Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual’s right to own a gun for private use, thus striking down the district’s handgun ban. But D.C. is a federal enclave. The question of whether the amendment protects a broad constitutional right and should therefore override state and local gun-control ordinances, such as Chicago’s handgun ban, is still up in the air—but not for long.

From the Los Angeles Times:
The Supreme Court set the stage for a historic ruling on gun rights and the 2nd Amendment by agreeing today to hear a challenge to Chicago's ban on handguns. . . .

A ruling on the issue, due by next summer, could open the door to legal challenges to various gun control measures in cities and states across the nation. . . .

Lawyers for the gun owners argued that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" set out in the 2nd Amendment is "incorporated" into the 14th Amendment and thereby applies to states and localities.

Be sure to check out the full article, and then tell us your reaction.

It's always refreshing to see a  person reject "liberal" versus "conservative" politics in favor of  non-partisan rationality, and a good example of this can be found in this essay on the "liberal"-leaning news site Salon.
 
From the story:
 
I was a violent kid. More than anything, I loved to  play war. In my basement, I built a sandbag foxhole out of stacked-up sofa  pillows. I would hide inside and peer out at what I imagined were the smoking slopes of Iwo Jima, crawling with Japanese soldiers ready to fight to the death.

My parents were liberal. More than liberal: Unitarians. We had a National Organization for Women poster hanging in our kitchen. A family friend stayed with us at the house while going through a sex change. My dad was, and probably still is, an advocate of the most  draconian gun control proposals ever drafted, or even pondered. I'm sure both my parents voted for Carter, probably Dukakis, too. I remember a lot of family skinny dipping. Hell, my parents wouldn't even let me play on a football team.

That does not mean, however, that I have to do everything exactly the way they did. Now, I have a son. He is just turning 4. And I have decided to arm him to the teeth.

As the father of a well-adjusted and completely normal  child who also happens to think R. Lee Ermey's "Lock N Load" is the coolest show on television and who recently informed his  parents that he wants to be a "gun expert" when he grows up, I  commend  the "liberal" author's rejection of the ridiculous notion that toy guns somehow turn kids into killers. It shows that maybe, just maybe, common  sense is more powerful than political ideology.

It was damn near thing, pointing to a significant shift among moderate Democrats on gun control. The vote split the democratic leadership, with Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) supporting the measure.

From the Washington Post:

By the narrowest of margins, the Senate's liberal bloc of Democrats defeated an amendment that would have allowed gun owners to carry their weapons across state lines without regard for stricter laws in many jurisdictions, giving preference to states with looser standards. . . .

Even in defeat, the debate demonstrated the continued power of the National Rifle Association and gun rights advocates in Congress, because the Thune amendment was considered the most far reaching federal effort ever proposed to expand laws to allow weapons ownership.

Be sure to read the full article and tell us your reaction.