I want to hear a consensus on this, please
If the founding fathers had meant for people to have as many guns as they want the 2nd amendment would have said " The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed" saying anything beyond this means they had some type of limitations in mind. The part "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" means without a doubt that they had some kind of limitations in mind. It would have been nice if they had explained what that limitation was a little better, but they definitely had limitations in mind
2
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
5 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.
Probably the same reason the 1st amendment sees fit to say more than 'you can say what ever you want'. They felt the need to add to it that it includes the press and the right to worship what ever god you believe in, etc. The militia is made up of the civilian citizens, not the Army. lt's really not that hard to understand if you think about it.
Captain_Feelgood
Level 8
May 8, 2018
0
@Seeker55 Well, l'm not sure l agree with you that perception is reality. l can watch a magician and perceive that s/he makes a dove appear out of thin air, but l know it probably came out of his/her sleeve in a well done slight of hand move... l don't care how many people see the trick done, it still isn't magic, it's an allusion.
As much as I am a strong supporter of strict gun control, I do not agree with your interpretation of the clause. I do not see anything that would've suggested a limitation.However, had the gift of foresight, they, like any civil society would have addressed with more specificity. As it is written, I see huge holes and is open to wide interpretation.
Dingodog
Level 7
May 8, 2018
1
Why would you say all that stuff about militia if they didn't have any limitations in mind. If they had no limitations in mind why muddy the waters with the militia stuff. if you wanted everybody to have guns you would have said the right of the people to bare arms shall not be infringed, you would have kept it simple so nobody could get confused. they would never have put the part about militia unless they had some kind of limitations in mind
The point also needs to be made that the population, way of life, types of weapons & ammo, & many other things have changed. The 2nd Amendment was itself an "amendment". The Constitution was meant to be a living thing. I am not for the repeal of it, but we do need to come to a "modern" consensus on what we want from it & what it should mean for us, as a society in today's world. If we were to be strict constructionists we would still have only land-owning, white males voting. Now, there are probably some that would love to go back there, but that ship has long sailed! Let's live as best & as safely as we can in today's society!
phxbillcee
Level 10
May 8, 2018
2
They had no way to know where this country would be 200 years forward
To me, there is no arguing this point. You can't get anymore straight foreword than that. The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed, I don't see anyway that you can argue adding anything to that, doesn't mean they had some type of limitations in mind.
MikeFlora
Level 7
May 8, 2018
1
@Druvius lf you pass the background check, and pay the tax for a class lll stamp, you can buy a fully automatic (machine gun), silencer, etc. ... just saying.
@Captain_Feelgood Only in some states, there are several states that ban automatic weapon s totally. I think the point here is we need a better description of what exactly "arms" are
@Druvius And what would that accomplish?
@MikeFlora Actually in most states, there's only 11 states that completely outlaw fully-autos.
@Druvius You already have to do that for any hand gun, semi-auto or not, and there are ten times as many deaths by hand guns as there are semi auto rifles. That proves your plan of making it harder to buy a magazine fed rifle will only be a nuisance to law abiding citizens.
Recent Visitors 33
MikeFlora
OH, USA
Kojaksmom
Blue Dot In Red State,
AwarenessNow
RockyMountainHigh,
Eirteacher
Cactus Prick AZ,
Captain_Feelgood
NC, USA
Photos 509 More
Posted by DruviusMake it make sense.
Posted by FrostyJim...what a sad situation.
Posted by ButtercupI doubt she said it buts it's cute.
Posted by Smurfing101
Posted by DruviusAh yes, modern America.
Posted by Tejas
Posted by SwitchcraftSandy Hook 13th sad anniversary - 12/14/12
Posted by SwitchcraftSandy Hook 13th sad anniversary - 12/14/12
Posted by MoravianSad but true.
Posted by DruviusAlways loved this one.
Posted by TejasAnti trump pistol. Do you have mixed feelings about it?
Posted by TejasLook at this scary gun!
Posted by Tejas
Posted by SeaGreenEyezThe most unaware "Awareness Day" in America was yesterday.
Posted by SeaGreenEyezThe most unaware "Awareness Day" in America was yesterday.
Posted by SeaGreenEyezThe most unaware "Awareness Day" in America was yesterday.