Regarding Ol' Tommy Carper and anyone citing their own (alleged) firearms as proof of 2nd Amendment support, please remember that "support" is somewhat subjective in nature. First, even if the speaker does like/have firearms, they may be 17th on his/her list of concerns, where they are much higher on your list. That means the other person may take pro-2A steps or actions, as long as those actions don't interfere with his/her other higher priorities.
Second, many moons ago, the NRA was divided between hunters and everyone else. The hunters believed that the government wasn't out to take hunting rifles, basically because many of the politicians were stating "we're not out to take your hunting rifles." A lot of things took place, though: most anti-gunners dropped the "militia argument," which then placed all firearms in the figurative crosshairs; many politicians openly stated that that they wanted all guns banned; hunting rifles started looking more like the "bad" guns; a lot of folks realized that the "bad" guns and the hunting rifles worked the same way; hunters and hunting areas are seemingly declining; and more people got firearms exclusively for defense purposes. And as much as that's the way things used to be, sometimes it looks like certain folks are still trying to segregate firearms by type. So, it's possible that the speaker may have that old-school approach to firearms -- hunting rifles good, everything else bad.
Third, and most important and obvious, if it's a politician speaking -- he/she's probably lying.