|
I've always wondered, and i guess it kind of clinches it for me in terms of how many grains of salt i take with the second amendment, but how far can you go with the definition of "arms"? It seems like contemporary references only refer to guns, but why?
If i were writing a constitution, and wanted to ensure that the citizens of the government for which it was intended would be able to protect themselves from government tyranny (assuming that that was the case) i would probably want to go a little further than just protecting the right to bear arms. I imagine that i'd want to protect the right ammunition, too, since without ammunition you're probably better off with a crowbar than with a gun. And shit, if i were serious, i'd make it so the government couldn't limit the type of gun owned, since it would be all to easy for a tyrannical government to simply issue everybody an air pistol, outlaw everything else and say, "There you go, there's your arm, we're within the letter of the law, shut the fuck up."
Now, i'm not a fucking genius, but if i were there writing the constitution i might have been a little less vauge if i thought it was important.
|