Hey, uh, Perfessor, I might be just a bit ignorant about things, so please enlighten me:
Where the F, exactly, does the 2nd Amendment say anything about such trivial activities as hunting and target shooting?
Being a perfessor and all, you might understand better than me, but this one little fact keeps nagging at me, namely:
Why on Earth would the leaders of the Founding Generation add such a trivial clause to a document that was intended to create a government fit to govern our nation for all of posterity?
I mean, come on, Perfessor, many of these guys who voted for it had, just 15 years before the 2nd Amendment was ratified, started and participated in (at great personal cost and risk) an open insurrection against the most powerful empire the world had seen, an empire considered to have legitimate authority here by most of the population, and had engaged in combat against the most powerful army and navy of the day at a huge cost in blood and treasure. Oh, and a great number of the elected representatives of the people of this nation were terribly afraid of the power of a central government (like England's) being set up here - and they passed a bunch of other Amendments to limit its power. In view of these facts, is it REALLY the case that such men - even if they were white males and some owned slaves - were so enamored with the idea of hunting and target shooting that they'd put in a clause like this? Am I really so dense that I completely missed something?
Please, Perfessor, enlighten me...you condescending, paternalistic, anti-American f'ing, tyrant-wannabee!
We need to constantly remind the people what the militia in the 2nd amendment is REALLY for..... A citizen body organized for military purposes and by extension, logically equipped with weapons of military utility. Just consider that the founders of our nation had just finished defeating the greatest military power on the planet, thanks in no small part to a citizen militia, armed with military weapons such as the smooth bore Brown Bess musket, and often technologically superior rifled muskets. It is the height of absurdity to think that the second amendment in the Bill of Rights is primarily concerned with shooting bunny rabbits.
If we don’t constantly emphasize the constitutional reasons for the Second Amendment than we shall surely lose it, because hunting, while a worthy enterprise, is too trivial a reason to maintain it has a constitutional protection. We need to emphasize to our hunting bretheren that maintenance of the second amendment’s constitutional rationale serves to protect their rights to continue to own firearms for hunting. But that pupose is subordinate and incidental to it’s primary purpose, quite literally the final check for the preservation of our republic from the depredations of untrammeled tyranny.