I don't believe that any of US where there back then, but if that's all the flexibility WE are capable of? WE THE PEOPLE might have let down our fore-fathers? This was supposed to be an evolving experiment, capable of change based on the needs of the Common Man. So if we want to accept the Solutions to the Tyranny of the far past as OUR course of action in the future, how far are Y'all willing to go to desecrate our Grandchildren's Freedoms in order that they once again bear the yolk of oppression?
Is thier future more important to OUR unwillingness to change, than those that come after US?
This is a poor attempt to obfuscate, but the Bill of RIGHTS were never intended to be "evolved" - they enumerate the 10 MINIMUM INALIENABLE Human RIGHTS. The Constitution does NOT give us these RIGHTS, it only ACKNOWLEDGES our RIGHTS. It was further described that the RIGHTS come from "natures God"...a lot of debate over the years as to why a bunch of Deists might have included that line...but its actually quite clear from a legal standpoint: whatever RIGHTS a superior being bestows on His creation, the subordinate being does not have the legal authority to undermine/change.
Besides, what part of "shall not be infringed..." do you NOT get? RECENT SCOTUS decisions have only reinforced that FACT.
Heller v Washington DC (2008) found that
individuals have a right to possess and carry firearms, then in
McDonald v Chicago (2010) they decided the 2nd Amendment is explicitly written
for individuals in cases where state & federal governments seek to regulate individual ownership of
any gun (i.e.,
the 2nd Amendment was meant to limit government, NOT individuals[/I]) and
Caetano v Massachusetts (2016) reiterated the earlier rulings listed above - and ADDED that "the Second Amendment extends to ALL instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding" and that its protection is "not limited to only those weapons useful in warfare."
There is no "living document" clause. That's a bastardized concept and argument. It's only a living document in the sense that changes are ONLY ALLLOWED to happen in a PROSCRIBED process - detailed in the Constitution. It was SPECIFICALLY designed NOT to be changed by "case law" creep...which is the preference of RIGHTS DENIERS. It was never intended for a temporary majority to make radical changes to in a cut-n-paste manner in any 4 or 8 year period. We do not accept the leftist interpretation of a "living document" that can be changed by a congressional vote - neither to ADD extra hands & feet onto the LIVING being of the US Constitution, nor REMOVE entire enumerated RIGHTS that it merely RECOGNIZES.
The reality is this - RIGHTS DENIERS mobilize every time someone takes up a gun to do evil -
after a school shooting (usually by a left-wing nut on prozac) - yet they're eerily SILENT on the murder rate CAUSED by gun bans in Chicago, New York, Washington DC, and Los Angeles.
I've listened to arguments rolled out to capitalize on EVERY similar school shooting for 20 years - and THE ONLY thing that hasn't been tried is to ADD guns to the equation. Let ANY teacher that holds a conceal carry license, like the beloved Parkland football coach who was gunned-down by the murderer when he threw himself in front of children that were not his own - while FOUR government protectors in the role of Broward Sheriff Officers were either COWERING under a stairway (TRAINED resource officer), or behind their vehicles (THREE Broward Sheriff's Deputies).
What YOU propose is FANTASY (use pressure and emotion to make the case to eventually ban ALL guns, after every such crisis) and has NOT WORKED in the more than 20 years I've been watching this.
The ONLY thing you want is ALL guns to be removed from society - a comical, farcical, absurdity - and you won't let ANY crisis go to waste to get it.
There is ZERO "common sense" about THAT strategy - just ask the disarmed VICTIMS of Chicago, New York, Washington DC, and Los Angeles - that is the true desire of ABSOLUTE RAVING MORON anti-gunners.
THE ONLY "Common Sense" approach I'm willing to consider is: ARM THE TEACHERS WHO WANT TO BE ARMED - AND ARE ALREADY LICENSED TO CONCEAL CARRY...
Give our kids the same level of expectation for security that they would receive at a Police Station or a Bass Pro Shop..(there's a reason no one constantly rings there hands over the most recent "Police Station Shooting" or Bass Pro Shop Shooting"...its because even craven murderers know the odds of taking on someone equally armed and capable of shooting back)!
THAT'S called American "Common Sense" ...