I'll preface by saying that I don't watch network news. I get most of my news from a local talk-radio station, and gleaning by context from various internet sources. Having said that, I have been paying attention to the events transpiring in Ferguson, and surrounding communities. I'm a Field Service Technician, and drive all over the greater St. Louis Metro Area on a dailty basis, and have been paying attention lest I accidentally drive into a previously "quiet" part of town that has since erupted in demonstration, or violence. My "internet gleanings" of the events have focused mainly on the debate of the militarization of the our various police forces. One thing I've seen is a few anti-gun types "floating" the idea the Michael Brown died as a result of the Second Amendment. These people's reasoning appears to be that, with a heavily armed populace due to the Second Amendment, the police are forced to arm themselves in not only likewise manner, but with full-blown military-grade hardware, in order to maintain "superiority" over the American populace. And that these now heavily armed police are "quick on the trigger," and wind up killing the Michael Brown's of the U.S., due to having to constantly face the threat of a heavily armed civilian populace. To some people's credit, even other anti-gunners that I know are discounting this, and dismissing it as not relevant. My personal suspicion is that someone, with an agenda , is "floating" this narrative to see if it gains any "traction." My question to The High Road is this: has anyone else heard this "Second Amendment" theory behind the militarization of the U.S.'s police forces? If so, where, and in what context? Thanks in advance.