|
Actually its you who is missing the point. My point is that logical arguments can be made for either side of the 2nd. If someone had started arguing that the 2nd doesn't guarantee the right for individuals to have weapons, I'd have started arguing that it does. The 2nd is written in such a way that either side can interpret it as representing their point of view. It's fairly unique in that regard - no one argues whether the first amendment REALLY gives us the freedom of speech or not. It's pretty plain and clear in the way it's written that it does.
The REAL question is, why did the framers write the 2nd so vaguely? IMHO it's because they didn't REALLY want the average Joe Idiot to be able to get his hands on a gun, but on the other hand they also really didn't want the British to come back and find our population largely unarmed. They were between a rock and a hard place and they wrote the amendment vaguely so that it could be interpreted to suit the situation.
|