Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

1

edmund_the_destroyer wrote

I posted this elsewhere and I'll repeat it. The Second Amendment states that the right to bear 'arms' will not be infringed. 'Arms' means any kind of weapons, not just guns.

Would anyone care to argue that normal people have the unrestricted right to own grenades, grenade launchers, howitzers, surface-to-air missiles, explosives, chemical weapons, biological weapons, nukes? All of those would be really, really handy for fighting an oppressive government. So should we all be able to get any we want for any reason?

Everyone already agrees that there should be a limit on personal weapon ownership. Nobody sane says that I should be able to buy a nuke if that's what I want, just in case I have to drive it to DC and take out Congress because they passed an oppressive law.

So it's not a question of whether gun rights can be regulated. They can. The question is where we draw the line. And we should have an intelligent debate about that. But don't spout nonsense that all these rules violate our second amendment rights and they're all categorically immoral and unconstitutional.

(...or am I arguing with a bunch of sockpuppets?)