This is the reality of disarming a populace
- Thread starter Sleepless_in_Jefferson_County
- Start date
I wanted an answer. That doesn't make her an expert on constitutional law.
You guys want to overturn something written by a bunch of guys who by and large were all the smartest guys in the room because a bunch of high school kids, many of whom probably can't spell constitutional, had a terrible experience.
Shows the emotional maturity of the left.
The smartest white males in the room 240 years ago, dealing with the facts of the world as of 240 years ago.
Something tells me you wouldn't like what the smartest guys in the world today would do about guns.
Nothing has changed
We still own slaves, women can't vote and we still burn witches to death
What does being white have to do with anything?
Again, you assume that the Founders were too stupid to realize that weapons would advance with time.
You'd be wrong though. Turns out that by the time the 2nd amendment was written, assault weapons already existed.
-The belton flintlock developed during the revolutionary war that could fire 20 or so rounds in 5 seconds with one pull of the finger.
-The girandoni rifle, where a 22 high capacity round magazine accurately could be fired within 30 seconds created during the revolutionary war which was later used by Thomas Jefferson to famously outfit the lewis and clark expedition.
- The Puckle gun early gatling gun created 60 years before the revolutionry war.
- Pepper box revolvers could hold over 20 rounds and were developed hundreds of years before the founding fathers.
The Founders were surely aware of these guns and weren't stupid enough to think advancements wouldn't take place.
In some parts of the world that is still true...not in any parts of the Western Judeo-Christian (predominantly) white world that was settled and founded largely by the Bible and guns. Yes it took us a while to get where we needed to be, but you'd be hard pressed to find a better place to live, especially if you're a minority or LGTBQAAI than in America. Period.
Thank god that bible meant they did not rape and destroy existing civilizations. They just shared the good word and moved on
It is total nonsense to pretend that the Founders envisioned America exactly as it is today when they wrote the second amendment. All the little bullets in your post ignore that core point.
Their amendments reflected the concerns of their time. For example, no one drafting a bill of rights today would leave the 3rd amendment in the ten most important additions to the document.
They knew changes would have to be made to the constitution, that's why they included a very simple mechanism to make changes to it so it would reflect a changing world
IF people think the 2nd Amendment is antiquated all they have to do is propose a change to the constitution, have it pass Congress by a 2/3 vote, then be approved by 38 of the states. Its been done many times in the past .
Problem is the majority of citizens support the second amendment just like it is so you liberal left wing snowflakes can go kick rocks
The Founders designed an amendment system that is a little too restrictive overall. Lots of countries have copied our idea of the Constitution. Basically all of them improve upon it by having a more reasonable amendment approach.They knew changes would have to be made to the constitution, that's why they included a very simple mechanism to make changes to it so it would reflect a changing world
IF people think the 2nd Amendment is antiquated all they have to do is propose a change to the constitution, have it pass Congress by a 2/3 vote, then be approved by 38 of the states. Its been done many times in the past .
Problem is the majority of citizens support the second amendment just like it is so you liberal left wing snowflakes can go kick rocks
its been done 27 times so its not like its that difficult (1992 being the last)
Just needs to be a change that is supported by a broad coalition of citizens
j
They knew changes would have to be made to the constitution, that's why they included a very simple mechanism to make changes to it so it would reflect a changing world
IF people think the 2nd Amendment is antiquated all they have to do is propose a change to the constitution, have it pass Congress by a 2/3 vote, then be approved by 38 of the states. Its been done many times in the past .
Problem is the majority of citizens support the second amendment just like it is so you liberal left wing snowflakes can go kick rocks
They didnt even envision 50 states. Its so much harder to amend the constitution now its not even funny.
That's not a lot for ~230 years, and 10 of them happened right away, along with multiple after the civil war when Reconstruction governments were able to shove them through in former Confederate States.
The process is a little too onerous. There hasn't been a material amendment in 47 years (the 27th is not material.)
It should be difficult to amend the Constitution, but it should be easier than it is in the US. Realistically, there is no ability for anyone in the US to pass an amendment of substance, and there hasn't been a serious chance of such an amendment since the ERA died in the 1970s. It's effectively dead as a path to substantive change or substantive protection of personal rights.
The state part is the bigger problem, yeah, but there's also a lot more members of congress now, and it's tougher to envision a scenario in which they would work together in a way to make passing such an amendment possible.
I would think the ratios of 2/3 and 3/4 would be the same no matter the total number of states??
And getting that many different states to agree with something as opposed to 13?
Get a clue, Fan.
This is exactly the thing I've been talking about. Her living through a tragedy doesn't make her an infallible expert on guns, gun control, or the Constitution, nor does it mean she's capable of dictating what law abiding citizens rights should be.
Similar threads
