How about jet fighter planes and 2000 pound bombs? It's not unreasonable to expect that our Founders could not anticipate every technological development.
But our Founders did foresee the need to amend the Constitution from time to time.
YOU don't get to change the clear meaning of the Constitution just because the Founders didn't anticipate a new development.
Tench Coxe wrote at the time of "the unlimited power of the sword". Our Founders envisioned no limits on the people's right to be armed. You may certainly make the argument that they should have. You may make the argument that they would if they knew of today's developments.
But it is outright nonsense to claim that the Constitution empowers the federal government to disarm the people in any way whatever. That is not what the Founders said and it is not what they meant.
While you mull this over, keep in mind that any enemy who is dedicated to your destruction will recognize no limits whatever on the force they will use against YOU.
Our government, in its misguided attempt to deny machine guns to the Branch Davidians, used machine guns, armored vehicles, pyrotechnic grenades, and poisonous gas.
Well, there were cannons, I wonder if there was anything written that would have mentioned those as specific arms “of the people”. Although they may have been too expensive for typical private ownership. However, perhaps some of the private sailing ships had cannon? Where there cannon on our side of the fight at Lexington? If there were - then I would imagine cannon WERE included in our rights. And a cannon back then would be comparable to a 2000 lb bomb today.
I was talking to my kids about how the 2nd Amendment is to protect us from the government, but obviously we would have a difficult time fighting a revolution against it. But, if conditions got so bad - perhaps the State National Guard could be used against the govt? (I’m thinking of some evil dictator that somehow “took over” - I imagine if it got bad enough several governors could band their Guard units together to fight).
if the 2nd amendment clearly and unambiguously gave everyone the right to own a suitcase nuke then it would be amended.
I don’t see the right to bear arms as a potential checkmate against the government. I see “being necessary to the security of a free State” as the factor.
Hamilton wrote in Federalist #29
“The power of regulating the militia, and of commanding its services in times of insurrection and invasion are natural incidents to the duties of superintending the common defense, and of watching over the internal peace of the Confederacy.”
Now, are suitcase nukes in the hands of immigrant muslims necessary to the security of a free state? No, it would lead to insecurity.
Uuuuuh . No. You can’t have fighter planes w/2000 pound bombs.
Koo koo...
Koo koo...
Ya think Ben Franklin's idea of newspaper circulation ever approached today's numbers? Radio, TV dawn on any founding father? Maybe we should redo the First Amendment in light of the same manner some want to redo the second?...AND limit the FIRST?....LOL....
Whoops...forgot McCain Feingold..already done that!