
Originally Posted by
MN-E
Technically speaking, the 2nd amendment doesn't specify firearms... only "arms". Obviously, there's the whole argument as to whether "we the people" means the citizens individually, or collectively as a nation. But, if we interpret the 2nd amendment as granting individuals the right to own firearms, then we must also grant the right to those same individuals to own nuclear, chemical and bio-weapons.
And why not? Nuclear bombs don't kill people, PEOPLE kill people! Ooh, and if we outlaw anthrax, then only criminals will have anthrax!
Obviously, I don't seriously support this idea. My point, however, is that (hopefully) most of us can agree that not ALL restrictions and/or laws are a bad thing. Guns are not inherently bad. Gun laws are not inherently bad; banning certain types of weapons, requiring background checks, maybe even *gasp* registration & education is NOT going to lead to people taking away our guns.
And it pains me to see the conversation take that "slippery slope/end of freedom" turn everytime we, as a nation, examine & discuss our gun laws.
I know there are extremists on one side who would like to see all guns go away; there are also extremists on the other side who would LOVE to keep nuclear (and nook-ya-ler) weapons stashed in their van down by the river.
I just think that the majority of us are more rational, and we can meet somewhere in the middle.
Bookmarks