The second amendment states; "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."
When it was written it was referring to the arms of the times; rifles, artillery, pistols. Nowadays arms comprises a very long list including nuclear bombs, biological weapons, (including infectious agents and neurotoxins) as well as automatic and semi-automatic weapons, grenades etc., etc.,
The right of people to bear arms HAS already been infringed because individuals cannot own particularly lethal weapons such as nukes and biological agents. The question is where should we draw the line that both respects the intent of the second amendment and protects the public safety? Where would YOU draw the line?
Please no nonsensical rants. Give me reasoned arguments. Thanks.
2007-01-20
01:59:52
·
9 answers
·
asked by
Dastardly
6
in
Politics