Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnR
To treat law abiding people as the enemy is not the solution. But it is great for votes.
|
To equate any attempt to alter gun laws with the intent to save lives as an attempt at taking away all gun rights is not the solution. But it is great for votes.
Also, in almost every recent mass murderer, the person was a law abiding person up until the guy gunned down kids, teachers, concert goes, club dancers, etc. There are certainly ridiculous components of gun laws, but gun laws are not inherently ridiculous.
I like guns. I tagged along on hunting trips from as young as 5 or 6 and love to shoot. I am now convinced the founders "messed' up.
Supreme Court decision in US v. Miller 1939 2nd amendment intent and implication was for weapons related to a "well regulated militia" only. Based on everything I have read about the lead up to the second I am convinced that is what the founders intendedband as such is antiquated. The concern of the founders was the shift of security from State militias to federal forces. Leads to the question, in modern times, do well regulated state militias that provide protection against the federal army exist and should the intent to protect them dictate modern gun policy?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device