Guns have evolved. The second amendment hasn't.

@TerriCity
Guns have evolved but the intention behind the 2nd amendment has not.
If you don't even understand the purpose of the 2nd amendment then don't try to change it. It's a knee jerk reaction just like Australia had back in 1996. Our government changed the classification for mass shootings and they also falsify criminal reports to manipulate the statistics for political purposes. This is blatant corruption and we the people are powerless to stop it. Innocent men, women and children have been attacked by armed violent criminals. They are thugs who deserve to be shot, but in Australia you can't even carry a knife, baton or pepper spray for self defense. We are a nation of perfect victims.

@Lancer I understand the intent of the second amendment, which reads "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of the state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed". If you remember your third grade history, the founding fathers created a militia to fight the revolution against the British. The original "Military" of the colonies was this militia made up of farmers, tradesmen and such. Our country has built the most powerful military in the world. We do not normally call upon our farmers and townfolk to turn out with their blunderbusses to fight foreign enemies. This is called "Evolving". If you look at countries that do employ a modern militia, you can look at Switzerland. The Swiss keep arms in their homes in the name of patriotic duty. The difference is that the Swiss are highly trained and do not take the keeping and bearing of arms lightly. They have a much lower rate of gun violence (although domestic violence deaths are still a problem) and they do not use assault weapons.

@TerriCity
Fair enough. I still would prefer to be armed since the US military has killed hundreds of thousands of defenseless civilians in the past and continues to do so into the future. So the fact that Americans want to be armed because they fear their murderous government isn't really something we can argue against.

If your dad had killed 100 people and you had to live in his house would you prefer to be armed or defenseless?

Just an extreme example but that's how it is today with the US

This is satire, bro! He's on our side! (Tho Ingrahm surely isn't!)