Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom
My point exactly.
The 2nd is not absolute and neither guns nor society are anything at all like ther were back then. Some of the FF argued that the well regulated militia woud be required to meet anually to ensure their readiness. We now have our military which pretty much renders part of the amenment obsolete. If unlimited rights to own guns was their intention, all that needed to be writen was "The right to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged." End of story. But they added a qualifier that is no longer valid.
In the Heller case, the Court took liberty to set up rules that should be set up by the legislature.
|
That's all well and good, except it completely ignores the contemporaneous writings, speeches, and letters of many of the founders that clearly show they intended the right to keep and bear arms to be an
individual right, never mind their concerns and distrust of a standing army.
So how would you go about removing 20 million+ AR-15s from circulation?
