Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch
Unless someone can outright convince the courts that the commercially available weapons are weapons of war, you're argument dosen't work. A gun manufacturer will just point out that civilian designed weapons are far more limited then the ones that they sell to the US government.
I'd also ask you to clarify for me, because I'm dumb how you're argument around that phrase of the first amendment impacts at all on the second amendment.
|
How long have people been calling for gun control both federally and through their own state governments? When these shootings happen all I see is the people who are affected take their grievances on this issue to their political leaders only to see their complaints and pleas for proper gun reform fall on deaf ears. You say so yourself that if the founding fathers could have envisioned guns of the future that they probably would have made adjustments to or outright omitted the 2nd amendment. Well to me how I understand that part of the first amendment is it implores and gives the right to Americans to speak grievances to issue that affect them directly to the government and seek their aid for a solution to said grievances.
Maybe I’m dumb on that, maybe I’m wrong on how I understand it, or how I’m reading that part of the constitution... but I don’t think it’s wrong for people to want or expect an answer on this problem after tragedy upon tragedy and when ever it’s brought up or talked about the solutions for the 2nd amendment are both weak and a callous disregard of the problems that stem from them.