|
It has always confused me, those who always believe the Rights of the Press, Speech, and Religion shall not be infringed are often the very same who wish to ignore or dismantle the 2nd.
If the Amendment is out of date, what is to say the others are? Granted, we have changed added and subtracted Amendments in the past. However, it has taken further Amendments to do it, which require the approval of the people and a massive judicial/legislative efforts. The 2nd Amendment has taken a PR blitz from those who oppose it that would never work with the other Amendments.
Who would could claim that the 5th Amendment is no longer applicable? It would make our cities safer. It would help reduce crime. It would put those who deserve it in prison. Remember, it's for the Kids. No, it's absurd to claim this. The forefathers understood this, and provided provisions for it. A society with freedom will always have a form of danger inherent in the system. Give people rope and someone will find a way to hang themselves, give them a fork someone will stab someone else with it.
To claim that getting rid of guns is for our safety is parking a car on a steep hill without a handbrake. There will always be the next step, that if not taken nulls out the previous steps.
__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas
|