|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 27 2012 @ 03:48 PM EST |
The right to bear arms should not have limits. When the US bill of rights was
written, a lot of the drafters had strong reasons to distrust the government.
The right to bear arms was explicitly included as the second amendment. The
drafters knew that the England monarchy had attempted to outlaw crossbows
several hundred years earlier as it enabled a peasant to take down a government
tax collector ( a knight in shining armour) without a great deal of effort and
they would have been aware of other government efforts at arms control.
Both the church of England and the Pope tried to outlaw crossbows in the 1100's
using the rationale that they could be employed against Christians and
Catholics. Our founders knew this when they wrote the second amendment. The
founders also that weapons technology improves (become more deadly) with time.
For example, the founders would have been aware of the availability of cheap,
mass-produced muskets with interchangeable parts, an improvement that was
occurring at the end of the eighteenth century.
Just because our founders knew nothing about assault rifles, does not mean that
they would have excluded assault rifles or any other advanced weapon in the
second amendment, when the bill of rights was written, the authors had very
explicit reasons to not trust the government to "protect" them.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
