This thread again
This. lol.
Yeah, people like to argue about this. I think I've made my position pretty plain: I don't believe private citizens should be allowed to own handguns. The Constitution only guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, it doesn't say which arms. Shoulder-mounted rockets are arms, but we are not allowed to keep and bear them. In fact, we place all kinds of restrictions on just what arms private citizens are allowed to own. I would like to see those restrictions extended to include all handguns. I believe private ownership of firearms should be limited to rifles and shotguns.
But that's in my dream world. I recognize the fact that it's not going to happen.
I actually wouldn't mind that. I can defend my house just as easily with a shotgun than I can with a handgun. lol. And have a rifle if I ever go hunting. lol.
Let's keep it civil.
this too.
I hear the "it's my right" argument a lot. I guess my response is that rights change. When the Constitution was written it was the right of white people to own black people. Men used to have a widely recognized right to beat their wives. Neither of these are true today. The Constitution is full of such dated references. Been asked to quarter any British troops lately?
I agree with this. The Constitution is very old and in my opinion, outdated. I think a lot of debates would be cleared up if we'd just simply rewrite it. But from my understanding, the reason we don't is cause it's one of the oldest continuous living forms of government on earth. In most, if not all other places, the government has been radically changed throughout the years.
Edit: and also, it was originally written to be vague so that it could change, based on interpretation, and last throughout the years without having to write another one.