Ajcane8
Recruit
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2016
- Messages
- 2,021
We can argue the "intent" of men dead for two and a half centuries for another two and a half centuries. Besides, the people that drafted the document in question were prescient enough to realize that their intent (such that it was in the year of our lord 1788) might be meaningless 20, 50, 250 years later - hence writing into said the document the framework to amend that document.The 'intent' was for 'the people' to be able to fight a war, not hunt rabbits or shoot skeet. And 'well-regulated' in that time meant well-oiled, well-armed, well-kept etc... not 'well moderated by the state'.
I whole-heartedly agree with your last statement though.
That said, the document clearly states "...a well regulated militia..." When we have a million man+ standing army (and hundreds of thousands of reservists), how necessary is a militia?
Unless you think (for whatever reason) that one day that same million man army will be pointing its guns (tanks, drones, jets, submarines, helicopters...) at you - in which case, you'll have bigger problems to deal with than whether or not unfettered (or barely fettered) access to means of war is a fundamental "right" granted to each and every American.