- Joined
- Mar 16, 2009
- Messages
- 47,457
- Reaction score
- 53,140
- Location
- Dixie
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Well, first let me say that military action is military action, no matter what year it is. And as I pointed out in the OP, not until the Heller decision did an agenda based reinterpretation of the amendment try and take hold "modernizing"... (read changing the meaning) the amendment. The OP may not subscribe entirely to your own interpretation, but it does have it's point and credibility.
Well, I don't agree. I think the founders were quite clear in their writing that they intended an individual right to arms.
But more to the point, even if it isn't so, I really don't care. I support the RKBA for a number of reasons. Philosophical: the capacity to use force is the only guarantor of freedom. Pragmatic: I'd probably be dead long ago otherwise. Personal: I like shooting sports and hunting.
If there were no 2A I'd be lobbying to create one.
But there is, and an individual right to arms was pretty clearly part of the Founder's world view and intent.