Second Amendment out-of-date?

Status
Not open for further replies.

McKevrox

Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
25
Location
Tennessee
On the day of the Virginia Tech massacre, President Bush attempted to offer a "heart-felt" apology that had all the warmth and pathos of a public relations sound bite. I do not doubt the president's condolence for the lives lost that day, but what is our leadership doing to keep these horrific incidences from happening? The answer, surprisingly enough, is nothing.

Continued:

http://badgerherald.com/oped/2007/04/20/second_amendment_out.php
 
I don't think he did, or should have, apologized at all, except perhaps for his failure to enforce the Second Amendment as against restrictions agaisnt firearms on campus.

"Out of date"? Maybe out of date like my 1945 Long Branch Enfield Number 4 Mark I*, which can send Mark VII ball ammunition 1,300 yards into a man-sized target.
 
Of course the 2nd amendment is outdated. Ever since we evolved past violence and abolished tyranny, weapons have been archaic and pointless. There is no need for weapons since we live in this evil-free Utopia.
 
This must be our day for links to stuff from 2007.

Heller's happened since then, the author is probably now a Junior and the folks commenting on the intent of the 2nd have probably read about SCOTUS' ruling since that time.
 
Yeah, I found this while browsing news. I didn't realise it was so old. But either way, it's good to know how the antis think.

I am of the opinion that Heller was overall a VERY bad thing for gun owners. The SCOTUS has essentially paved the way to regulate guns out of existance...the operative term from their decision being the word "reasonable" , as per usual.
 
I believe the "well regulated" phrase IS out of date since the word "regulated" has a significantly different meaning than it did 200+ years ago.

Back then it meant well stocked, kept in good working order and prepared, now it means controlled by government fiat.
 
McK, that isnt what Heller was about. The holding in Heller is that the 2nd Amendment secures an individual right to keep and bear arms irrespective of membership in a militia. Not every case is about everything. The Court limits its holdings as much as it can. Further litigation will further define our rights. Nothing was held regarding regulation, the Court only said that some regulation may be reasonable. Everyone knows that already.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top