If Our Forefathers saw what is going on with school shootings, mall shootings, subway shootings

[titaniumsalute]

There wouldn't be a second amendment. I love these assclown extremists who bow down to the almighty second amendment. Of course it was written a few hundred years ago under extremely different geo-political, geographical and cultural times. That's not to say that it was written at a time where it took you a minute or two to load a god damn musket to make it fire which many times it didn't once you did all the work.

But if you say this to a gun nut you are anti-American, anti-Constitution, a liberal tree-hugger, etc.

[Ya Basta]

1. Nope

n/t

[randome]

2. People who lived more than 2 centuries ago should have ZERO impact on our society today.

[hack89]

5. Those people wrote the entire Bill of Rights

don't know about you but I enjoy my civil liberties.

[progressoid]

15. Those people didn't quite get it right either.

That's why it had to be amended so often.

Those Bill of Rights (the original 10) were only intended for white men. That's not really going to work today.

[hack89]

18. Those people also laid out a process to make further changes

knock yourself out.

[progressoid]

19. So you agree that it's OK to make changes to that old document then.

Excellent.

[randome]

22. So do I. Their ideas were good. But those people have no relevance to today.

We should stop looking at the Constitution like it's a sacrosanct bible. We should stop asking, 'What would Jefferson do?' I couldn't care less what Jefferson would do.

[hack89]

24. They included a process to make changes.

given enough support you can amend the Constitution to your hearts content.

[titaniumsalute]

6. I agree

We had slaves...which were legal. We took care of that in the amendments. Women couldn't vote. We took care of that in the amendments. There's been a precedent set to repeal an amendment (prohibition 18th was repealed with the 21st.)

The second amendment was enacted in 1791. A little has changed since then. For example, there were only 3.9 million Americans. Period. States were individual countries basically. Most food was hunted. Indians still attacked in some places. And obviosuly a lot more.

[NYC Liberal]

10. That's not quite true.

They had lots of good ideas that are still relevant.

However, we should stop deifying them. They were human beings. Just because Jefferson or Madison thought something doesn't mean it's automatically right.

We should not be afraid to get rid of outdated laws and ideas.

[randome]

23. Yes.

[limpyhobbler]

3. Jefferson and Madison would be hard core right wingers today, including about guns.

YMMV.

[A HERETIC I AM]

12. Not bloody likely.

Jefferson couldn't get elected to a fucking school board today, much less to any high national office. Ditto Madison.

Neither of these men, and for that matter, the majority of the Constitutional Congress would fit in any way with today's Republican party.

Hell, If Jefferson was alive today, the media would treat him with the same contempt that they give Dr. Michael Newdow.

[Zoeisright]

17. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAH!!!

Do you have unicorns living in your bathroom?

[Recursion]

4. The murder rate then was orders of magnitude higher than today

So, probably not.

[datasuspect]

7. "Our" forefathers

would be pissed that they couldn't own slaves.

[Spider Jerusalem]

8. "the roots of the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of children"

I am waiting for an NRA spokesman to come out and say this any day now.

[CreekDog]

9. our forefather's never intended gun ownership to be as widespread as it is now

their 2nd amendment was not only never intended to help facilitate mass shootings, it was never intended to facilitate anywhere near the level of mass ownership of what would be considered arsenals by standards of today or the Founders' time.

[Spider Jerusalem]

11. Well, they may have done

there was still a frontier in those days; the militia was every able-bodied man with a rifle (which was used for hunting and, on the frontier, occasional self-defence; my 5x great-grandfather was a gunsmith in Kentucky). However the need for a "citizen militia" has been obviated by the organisation of police forces and the National Guard, military reserves, and so on. Under US Code the "unorganised militia" consists of every able-bodied man between 18 and 45, but it would take a national crisis of unimaginable proportions to result in the embodiment in service of the "unorganised militia".

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. The intent was for the militia

A well regulated one. The courts and the NRA have changed it. The well regulated militia of back then included a monthly drill. If this sounds like the Guard, that's what it is.

They did not intend for people to own military grade weapons, at the time that would be the Kentucky Long Riffle, without those monthly drills...think minutemen, that was the intent.

[Johonny]

20. the nature of warfare changed so dramatically too

and the 2nd amendment comes out of a discussion of how a free society should form and/or maintain a military. The modern military generally makes the discussion obsolete. So I imagine with 200+ more years of history on warfare Madison would have probably had a different perspective of the problem. It is impossible to know what a Jefferson or Madison would have thought about such subjects. Although they did leave us the right and obligation to actually think about these subjects ourselves and reach different conclusions based on new information.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. Absolutely.

I think today they would look at it as military, guard and police forces.

Civilians would be limited to licensed weapons in a short list.

As to our "modern day militias" good luck stoping the military with your AR-15. Yes, it can be done, but not the way these types think of it.

I suspect the AR would be a weapon not allowed even in hunting hands unless...the only setting possible was single shot and very short magazines, five to seven rounds, and strict licensing.

[indepat]

14. Didn't junior say the Constitution is just a piece of paper? Notwithstanding, a little piece of it,

the Second Amendment, is sacred and sacrosanct, while much of that piece of paper is being trampled on to keep us safe from terra except the ubiquitous homegrown kind.

[Poll_Blind]

16. That's not even remotely plausible. nt

PB