Quote:
Originally Posted by bob47
Let's invent a time machine so we can let our founding fathers see what 21st. century weapons are like. And then we'll be able to ask them, without having to speculate, what they intended the 2nd. amendment to do.
|
You are absolutely correct, if only the FF's could see us now I have faith in their intelligence that they would have worded it such...so that we don't have the all but uncontrolled gun society that now exists.
Especially given that the FF's had no clue as to the size our STANDING military would become (we no longer depend on 'militia's')...and the weapons now available.
The problem started back in 1886 (and subsequent decisions)...when the Supreme Court got it wrong.
Presser v. Illinois - Wikipedia
Quote:
|
However, the high court stated that there is a limit upon state restriction of firearms ownership, in that they may not disarm the people to such an extent that there is no remaining armed militia force for the general government to call upon:
|
They ignored the
"well regulated militia" part and solely concentrated on the
"shall not be infringed."
Sadly, a number of other decisions have done the exact same thing.
I don't believe there is a single answer, and admittedly it is a complex decision, but I feel strongly that the answer isn't...MORE guns.
And to even start a discussion, will take the NRA to quit trying to support firearm manufacturers by constantly screeching and trying to scare everyone by falsely stating...
'THEY'RE trying to take all of your guns away.' 