LETTER: A founding father do-over
A founding father do-over
I do not own a firearm or plan on ever doing so.However, I support the 2nd Amendment and the rights to have firearms. With all of the recent controversy I have given much thought to the 2nd and its meaning. Unlike some paranoid individuals who feel that the 2nd was put in the Constitution to prevent government from invading our homes, taking our weapons, and enslaving society, I believe the Founding Fathers had a much different agenda.
After the Revolutionary War, the militia was disbanded and sent home. There was no standing army and yet there were threats to our countryborders. If a need arose that required a militia, they had only to conscript men who were already armed to form a new army. When the 2nd was written with this in mind, the writers also realized that the only weapons available were single shot, black powder and flint, metal ball muskets and pistols.
Today, imagine that the original founding fathers were tasked with writing the 2nd Amendment with the full knowledge of the history of the past 200-plus years. I will pose 3 possible scenarios.
1. Amendment stands as originally written.
2. Amendment eliminated because it isnít necessary today.
3. Amendment is rewritten allowing citizens to own hand guns, rifles, and shotguns. However all military ordinance, including firearms, ammunition, grenades, missiles, land mines, etc. are unnecessary and illegal for private citizens to own.
I believe that some variation of No. 3 would be enacted, especially when I hear the rampant paranoia of a few people that advocate having these weapons. It is scary, but fortunately those very bright Founding Fathers who got it right would surely get it right again to fit the current times.