if it it being presented that ONE amendment, the 2nd, be changed/updated/modifies/what ever to match what ever is being presented....then there is an error of major proportion and complete unacceptability. Why?
Because to single out one amendent, that some are prgudiced toward or against, simply suggests that all the rest of the constitution is correct, complete, accurate and needs no attention to "suit the times".
And why is it appropriate to also assume that the scrpture being quoted is the correct, accurate, "suitable for the times" document. That is substantially older than the constitution.
The problem of the "current times" and some folks outlook is the inability or refusal to accept enforcing the rules, laws, constitution in effect. The continual trek of special interest groups or lobbying to change what the majority of us have been and are willing to continue to respect are the rules and laws and practices in existence.
The 2nd amendment like global warming and immigration have become nothing more than a political, special interest group FOOTBALL.
How about forgetting the "intent" of our forefathers and just enforcing the law(s) of the land? They seem to have worked for a couple of centuries now....have they not?
btk
|