Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
Outlawing things becuase they have no reasonable use outside of shooting (i.e. seriously injuring or killing) another human being is smart. There is a reason that it's illegal to build, keep, or use a nuclear weapon in the US. That's why Democrats, after years and years of cleaning up the republimess, will probably turn their attention on certian guns. If you don't like it, vote Libertarian.
|
When they wrote the constitution what type of guns do you think they were refering to? They never cited "just hunting rifles" or "just single shot guns" or even "guns that can have another purpose besides killing a person" they said ARMS. Arms as in weapons. A hunting rifle is a tool, used to kill game so that you can eat. A weapon is something to be used in a contest of force. A weapon's sole purpose is to kill, maime, wound, whatever you are fighting.
As a reminder, the people that created this law, were not Frontiersmen or anything of the sort. How much hunting do you think went on in "the wilds of Boston" or the "Dark Forest of Philadelphia"? The rest of the Consitution was written to anticipate and adapt to change. I see no reason why they did not also expect weaposn technology to develope beyond the means they had back then. These were also people that had just survived a lenghty war. I'm quite sure they knew the grizzly reality of musket balls tearing into human flesh. Yet they still chose the word ARMS as in Weapons not as in hunting tools.
So to ban assualt rifles becuase their sole purpose for existance is to kill or injure people, is absurd.