Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightOfSappho
I don't see a problem with responsible adults owning firearms.
At the same time, I recognize that the founding fathers never considered weapons that can kill 50 people in 20 seconds, such as assault weapons.
I am thinking that the question that will be put before them is 'Isthe 2nd amendment referring to the general populus or to the militia?' THAT is the reason why I think that the precidence will be interesting.
|
Very interesting thought. Here's the the 2nd Ammendment: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
The language doesn't limit gun ownership to militias but was that the intent? Will we ever know? It also only says the right to bear arms. I agree with you that it doesn't specify what arms. A slingshot is a weapon as well as an assault rifle, although I doubt that's what they meant either.
I'm ambivalent to guns in the hands of responsible and trained owners, but I think backrground checks and mandatory training aren't a bad thing either. The ammendment doesn't say that the government can't require that you be properly trained to own your gun.
I grew up with 3 brothers and a Dad and Grandad who would hunt because my brothers liked to. I also have a rifle and a shotgun by default (belonged to hubbo's dad). I will not have ammo in the house though. And I will not use them unless I receive training or target shoot with someone who has. (I don't hunt, btw, and haven't gone target shooting in about 25 or 30 years.)