And they believed that bleeding would cure disease And they would tell you that you were crazy that something heavier than air could fly long distances, let alone travel to another planet.
Actually, I would guess that the founding fathers wouldn't have a problem with criminals, traitors, and the insane being allowed to own guns, which means they would support gun control.
Whoops, another "pro-gun" argument turns out to be baseless.
7. That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and their own state, or the United States, or for the purpose of killing game; and no law shall be passed for disarming the people or any of them, unless for crimes committed, or real danger of public injury from individuals; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up: and that the military shall be kept under strict subordination to and be governed by the civil powers.
Of all the actual primary source literature I've read, this is the most "gun friendly". But even with being "gun friendly" the no law shall be passed for disarming the people or any of them, unless for crimes committed, or real danger of public injury from individuals says to me that they would have no problem with gun control.
More importantly, the real issue for them is the last part of this:
as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up: and that the military shall be kept under strict subordination to and be governed by the civil powers.
If you read the actual document, that this the main concern: not private guns.
The reality is that the Second Amendment relates to: as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up: and that the military shall be kept under strict subordination to and be governed by the civil powers.
And Article I, section 8, clause 16 of the US Constitution.
Anyone with a shred of knowledge of the US constitution knows this is the case, with the exceptions of five people on the Supreme Court.
We can debate on WHY those five fail to realise this.
And they believed that bleeding would cure disease
ReplyDeleteAnd they would tell you that you were crazy that something heavier than air could fly long distances, let alone travel to another planet.
Actually, I would guess that the founding fathers wouldn't have a problem with criminals, traitors, and the insane being allowed to own guns, which means they would support gun control.
Whoops, another "pro-gun" argument turns out to be baseless.
From The Address and Reasons of Dissent of the Minority of the Convention of Pennsylvania to their Constituents: December 12, 1787:
ReplyDelete7. That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and their own state, or the United States, or for the purpose of killing game; and no law shall be passed for disarming the people or any of them, unless for crimes committed, or real danger of public injury from individuals; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up: and that the military shall be kept under strict subordination to and be governed by the civil powers.
Of all the actual primary source literature I've read, this is the most "gun friendly". But even with being "gun friendly" the no law shall be passed for disarming the people or any of them, unless for crimes committed, or real danger of public injury from individuals says to me that they would have no problem with gun control.
More importantly, the real issue for them is the last part of this:
as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up: and that the military shall be kept under strict subordination to and be governed by the civil powers.
If you read the actual document, that this the main concern: not private guns.
The reality is that the Second Amendment relates to:
as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up: and that the military shall be kept under strict subordination to and be governed by the civil powers.
And Article I, section 8, clause 16 of the US Constitution.
Anyone with a shred of knowledge of the US constitution knows this is the case, with the exceptions of five people on the Supreme Court.
We can debate on WHY those five fail to realise this.