Originally Posted by Vincent
This isn't personal Dan. Who you or I agree with or disagree with could not be less relevant. It's not a chess match or battle of wits with a Justice. It is the black and white, unavoidable, bedrock reality that the 2nd Amendment says what it says for the reasons the framers said it.
While you or I might question the practicality of a 14 year old coming to class with a loaded AR-15, such instances have no bearing on the validity or efficacy of the amendment. The framers had sufficient understanding of the human psyche, and the attendant foresight to express the amendment such that it precludes subsequent nefarious attempts to destroy our liberty through case law.
"the framers... the framers..."
i love guns as much as the next guy (because guns are cool, feel good to shoot, and its an awesome power to be able to quickly take a life and blow shit up) but i cant buy this weak argument about the 18th century muzzle loaders being infalliable and omnipotent. they sure missed the boat on the whole "all men are created equal unless they are a savage or slave" thingy.
i get that we are supposed to take up our arms and kill our fellow citizens (i.e. the gubmint) as soon as the 2nd ammendment is changed. sounds real good on paper. but to me it kinda strikes me the same as the death penalty. many people are for it. but for every 1000 people that are in favor of it, how many dozen would actually be willing to flip the switch and take extinguish the life.
since you are obviously the expert and well versed in the muzzle loader's intentions and thought process, please allow me to become edjumicated.
-where would the muzzle loaders buy their pea shooters? (i assume they couldnt just drive down to wal mart and pick one up or get one off the street corner for a $20 sack of crack)
-do you have any numbers on what the gun ownership per capita was back then? if i had to guess, and this is a pure guess, i would say 1 gun per household of 4 persons?
- what was the cost of a pea shooter relative to a persons monthly or annual income?
-is it fair to assume that a gun was likely a mans most valuable possession (besides a house, farm, horse etc.)? is it possible their pea shooter cost more than their main mode of transportation? I honestly dont know.