|
I don't think the Second Amendment needs to be repealed, because I think the thing with the Second Amendment is that its language inherently invalidates its application in most cases. As part of the Constitution, the Second Amendment uniquely moot. The Fifth Amendment is obviously very specific to the time in which it was drafted of course, but the Second Amendment is just founded on a whole other conception of how the country would work. The Revolutionary War was won through a confederation of local militias. The early United States originally resembled something closer to something like the EU. I think it's fair to say the intent of the Amendment was to ensure that each state had the ability to defend itself (And also kill Indians and stomp down slave rebellions). But the US military has became nationalized over time, we border only two other nations which are our allies. I think when people play at the Originalism game, there is a lot of trying to piece together a consensus on the intent of the Constitution. Some parts like the 5th Amendment are easy to connect the historical dots. Some like the Establishment Clause are more ambiguous. I've heard people argue the intent of the Establishment Clause was to stop infighting between Christian sects and persecution of Jews as it existed in Europe more than create a separation between religious concepts and the US. I disagree with the reading, but the first amendment is not clear on its intent, only the rights it lists. So, Originalists read the tea leaves and try to pull at historical context to stretch the meaning of those words. The Second Amendment actually names its intent, and it's clear that on that level that the United States as a nation is in fundamental opposition to that premise. We can look at precursor documents from both North Carolina, Vermont, Maryland, and Pennsylvania that clearly state that the concept of local militias that form in times of need wasn't just a practical manner, but the founders were suspicious of the idea of a standing army at all, and saw it as a potential evil. And like hey dead slave owners, samesies! While the US Constitution does give the federal government military powers, commentary from the founders leads us to believe it to be more supplementary with militias maintaining the main defensive force. And like look, if we wanted to say that the US Military should be dissolved, maybe I can get on board with the Second Amendment, but as it stands, we as a nation are having our cake and eating it too. We're dogmatically allowing people to have guns while also having the very standing armies that the Second Amendment was intended to be an alternative towards. The purpose of having arms (Not singularly guns, but arms) is to offer an alternative to a standing army. But the Constitution itself gives military powers to the Federal government even if its modern scale is greater than what some founders imagined. The intent of the Second Amendment is somewhat contradicted in the Constitution itself, and it's clear that militias are just a vestigial part of US defense... and ya know, imperialism. Don't get me wrong, I agree with the premise that the second amendment does indeed guarantee the rights to arms for individuals, but only on the premise that militias and civil defense coming from the people as opposed to solely the federal government are necessary. If militias aren't necessary and the original intent of the Constitution clearly doesn't reflect modern realities than it can't be taken seriously. The Second Amendment isn't an issue in of itself. The issue is that we've allowed capital interests to run a propaganda campaign with the idea that one specific type of weapon--its modern version made a generation after the Bill of Rights--is very special and protected by the Amendment.
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2022 14:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 19:18 |
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:On a national scale gun control proponents are worse at gun control than Ron loving DeSantis. Which should make anyone question either their competence or their sincerity if not both. DeSantis meanwhile was championing a month ago removing the need for licensing for conceal carries and after two mass shootings is penalizing one of his state’s professional sports teams for speaking about gun safety.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2022 20:18
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:One theme that tends to follow these discussions is the doublethink that the populace has so many arms that terrible violence is inevitable, but simultaneously so poorly armed that any thought of self-defense against right wing militias or a tyrannical government would be a fools errand. Timeless Appeal fucked around with this message at 13:33 on Jun 6, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2022 13:14
|
|