Right. Emphasis on "any kind of gun." I had a convo about this with an elementary school principal on NYE, and much to my surprise, she wants to be able to carry her loaded gun on her during the school day. To which I said, "Tha' shi cray." Let's keep industrial strength killing machines limited to the military alone, and we won't need our school principals to be sharp-shooting security guards. They have detentions to hand out.
The Framers gave citizens the right to bear arms so that they could defend themselves against an intrusive government. The idea that the people of the United States could fend off an attack by our own government against us became unrealistic with the advent of weaponry used during World War I, however. So let's not pretend the antiquated idea that private citizens can defend themselves against our officers and soldiers is even a remote possibility. Today, the only private citizens that want AR-15s are gangbangers and mafiosos.
Anonymous, you're plain wrong. Nowhere in the Constitution is anyone given the right to fire guns at the government; to underscore the point, I refer you to bothr The Whiskey Rebellion and Shay's Rebellion. If the Framers really thought people should get to "defend themselves against the government" through use of arms, they would not have put down these two instances of citizens taking up arms against a government they perceive was doing them wrong.
No, it's most likely that the framers enumerated the right to bear arms for exactly the reasons laid out in the Second Amendment; because they believed that "A well regulated militia" was "necessary to the security of a free state."
2 comments:
Right. Emphasis on "any kind of gun." I had a convo about this with an elementary school principal on NYE, and much to my surprise, she wants to be able to carry her loaded gun on her during the school day. To which I said, "Tha' shi cray." Let's keep industrial strength killing machines limited to the military alone, and we won't need our school principals to be sharp-shooting security guards. They have detentions to hand out.
The Framers gave citizens the right to bear arms so that they could defend themselves against an intrusive government. The idea that the people of the United States could fend off an attack by our own government against us became unrealistic with the advent of weaponry used during World War I, however. So let's not pretend the antiquated idea that private citizens can defend themselves against our officers and soldiers is even a remote possibility. Today, the only private citizens that want AR-15s are gangbangers and mafiosos.
Anonymous, you're plain wrong. Nowhere in the Constitution is anyone given the right to fire guns at the government; to underscore the point, I refer you to bothr The Whiskey Rebellion and Shay's Rebellion. If the Framers really thought people should get to "defend themselves against the government" through use of arms, they would not have put down these two instances of citizens taking up arms against a government they perceive was doing them wrong.
No, it's most likely that the framers enumerated the right to bear arms for exactly the reasons laid out in the Second Amendment; because they believed that "A well regulated militia" was "necessary to the security of a free state."
Post a Comment
Spam, vulgar language, trolling and off-topic comments are not tolerated at SFDB and your comment will be removed if it meets this criteria.