While that's a good point Pan, the entire problem with the 2nd Amendment as I've tried to outline in this thread is that it does a very poor job saying exactly what right it intends to confer on anyone. I'm not SURE that the framers intended to allow every individual to own a handgun for personal protection. I'm not SURE that they didn't. I personally think that they meant to immortalize and protect the process that they used to usurp British control over the colonies and that that process is both beyond meaningless 200 some years later.
Which says nothing for the fact that the vast majority of guns owned in this country are not owned or used with even the slightest thought towards local communities protecting themselves from a tyrannical federal government. I think there's a lot of merit to that right, given our history, but I don't think it's in any way the same as allowing people to have guns limited only by "reasonable restrictions."
Last edited by Frosstbyte; 03-23-2008 at 12:02 AM..
|