(02-12-2024, 10:36 AM)NYC4jags Wrote:

(02-12-2024, 01:00 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: The founders literally debated making firearm ownership mandatory, but considered it a violation of religious freedom. They also didn't see themselves having a standing army, and believed an armed populace was the best way to defend the nation. They also largely thought state rights superseded federal rights (obviously this became a quick point of contention in the new US). Regardless, any attempt to reshape the 2nd amendment debate into one about whether people could only carry as part of a militia is laughable and historically nonsence.

And I'm sure they clearly envisioned a "populace" chock full of mental nut jobs sauntering into synagogues, schools and wal-marts with long clips on AR-15s spraying lead into the defenseless. 

Clearly this was their intent - so we should honor that. 

And if they didn't mean what they chose to write in the amendment, they [BLEEP] that part up.

What's the difference in your scenario between an AR-15 and any one of a hundred semi-auto handguns, other than the fact the assault rifle is big and scary looking?  There is a mental health crisis spreading throughout the country and restrictions on firearms will not solve the underlying problem.  

The simple fact is it's impossible for us to know the full intent of the Founders and even if we did, is strict unwavering adherence the solution or a path to self-destruction? 

I don't believe it's fair to suggest they failed.  There's obviously no way they could have envisioned the world we live in today and crafted language to deal with burgeoning technology and social changes that wouldn't be seen for more than two hundred years.

---