HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » The Second Amendment, in ...

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 08:58 PM

The Second Amendment, in its Historical Context

Why 21st century guns aren't applicable to the wording of the 2nd Amendment:

http://moyerboard.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-second-amendment-in-its-historical_21.html

4 replies, 515 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 4 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Second Amendment, in its Historical Context (Original post)
CountSnail Dec 2012 OP
jmg257 Dec 2012 #1
hay rick Dec 2012 #2
Jenoch Dec 2012 #3
ComplimentarySwine Dec 2012 #4

Response to CountSnail (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 09:05 PM

1. Well - atleast the author is not another one trying to redefine what it says.

He just thinks it needs to be amended so guns can be better controlled.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CountSnail (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 09:17 PM

2. Good article.

From the article:

However, there is another historical element to the Second Amendment that is never discussed in the gun control debate: the nature of ďarmsĒ in the 18th century. When the Constitution was written, there were only three different kinds of ďarmsĒ: muskets, pistols, and rifles. Muskets, the weapon of choice for the colonists and the British during the American Revolution, were single shot, muzzle loaded weapons that were very inaccurate and had a slow rate of fire. The pistols of this era were also single shot weapons with spotty accuracy and a slow rate of fire. Rifles, while more accurate than the former two weapons, had an even slower rate of fire and were typically relegated to hunting expeditions.

All three of these weapons were used to perform feasible tasks in their day and age. Cities and towns were sparsely protected by any official army or police force, so they were a good tool for self defense. Grocery stores werenít around yet, so hunting was a necessity for many people if they wanted to eat. However, none of the aforementioned weapons could turn any single, unstable individual into a killing machine. They couldnít fire off dozens of highly accurate rounds in a span of a few seconds. They couldnít be reloaded in seconds. They couldnít be tweaked and remolded in ways that made them even more deadly.

Our 21st century weaponry was inconceivable to the Founding Fathers. Their concept of guns and a full-fledged national military were vastly different from the concepts that we now recognize. Therefore, itís unwise to accept the current wording of the Second Amendment as applicable in 2012.

This isnít a shocking or unpatriotic thing to say. Contrary to the common position touted by many Conservative pundits, the U.S. Constitution is not an untouchable, insoluble document. The Founding Fathers designed the Constitution so that new amendments could be added on and older ones could be repealed, and they did this for a reason. They, unlike their pseudo contemporaries, recognized that as times change, itís occasionally necessary to alter the Constitution to reflect new universal standards. Remember, this document once endorsed the concept of slavery, barred women from voting, and forbid the commercial distribution of alcohol. All of those unsavory elements of the Constitution were eventually nullified.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CountSnail (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 09:26 PM

3. Using the logic that

the 2nd Amendment was never meant for 21st century guns then the 1st Amendment was never intended for 21st century communication.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jenoch (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:38 PM

4. Look at how rapidly information spreads now

 

It seems possible for someone to do a great deal of damage now via the written word spread around the world in a matter of seconds. For instance, look at the mayhem that was supposedly caused by that video not too long ago.

Are you guys sure that you even want to keep the constitution around?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread