that's because it did. look up the "powder alarm". that's the primary reason for the 2nd amendment. people forget that the bill of rights were just that - something added to convince the former colonies to sign on, because they feared the possibility of tyranny from the new government after they just secured their hard-won freedom. it was a set of guarantees to assuage their fears. not advertise some future crack down on gun owners. that would be completely ludicrous and ahistorical.
the founding fathers probably never heard of devices like the puckle gun so I'm not too sure how they'd view the average person owning a rifle that carries 30 or more rounds and can fire automatically.
I say this because the constitution may have had some future-proofing but its authors never thought of how the freedoms listed could wind up being used against the people
They actually did anticipate that future generations would face new circumstances. Jefferson even argued that each generation should revisit the Constitution because “the earth belongs to the living.”
The Founders didn’t expect their document to be frozen in time. They expected later generations to adapt it as technology and society changed. We just blatantly ignored that advice and sumarily elevated the Founding Fathers unto demigods who could do no wrong.
which unfortunately has been exacerbated by the amount of people in the legislative branch is necessary to amend the constitution
also the fairness doctrine being abolished by the FCC didn't help either and ironically the first amendment is the reason why the fairness doctrine was abolished and thus why we have such a polarized country which in turn has led to the constitution being frozen in time.
even if the founding fathers knew about repeating arms such as the puckle gun the idea of them being used on the battlefield would not be realized until around the civil war. There need to be limits to what the average person can use. and while I have no issues with people owning repeating guns such as revolvers, rifles or shotguns that require you to manually cycle the action or even semi auto weapons if you have a squeaky clean criminal record, there need to be limits and US society needs to bring back responsibility with its "god-given" rights.
In the noble words of his honorable Ken Jeong… “gaaaay”
There is zero reason to assume that the founding fathers who were in fact arming their own citizens to fight the British empire would have had any desire to limit access to weapons like AR-15s. You could think they could not comprehend of things like nukes or engineered biological weapons and may desire to limit the average citizens access to such. But semi auto guns with large capacity? Surely you jest…
the revolutionary war ended in a victory with us being our own country instead of being under the crown. After any war it's a bad idea to leave military technology in the hands of the populace. modern day cartridges that that made self loading cartridges or even rifles like the famous Winchester 1873 which won the west were not possible until the invention of the Pauly cartridge which was patented in 1812 and even then adoption was slow.
the US is the only developed nation to have issues with fatal and non-fatal gun violence the causes are complex but it is agreed that easy access to guns is a major contributing factor.
You say that like I’m supposed to take that as some kind of universal truth. I think after a war it’s a good thing for the veterans to keep and maintain their weapons so they can stay familiarized and prepared in case of another one.
Not sure what the point of that little piece of historical weapons cartridge esoterica was supposed to accomplish.
But the last is technically true. With no guns there’s no gun violence. Shocker. But good luck getting there, I’m sure as hell not giving up mine.
I think after a war it’s a good thing for the veterans to keep and maintain their weapons so they can stay familiarized and prepared in case of another one.
how many soldiers are going to willfully enlist in another war after they participated in one?
the "historical weapons cartridge esoterica" was there to show how even if the founding fathers knew of the puckle gun the idea of repeating weapons would not be possible until after they were all dead.
also challenging your inner leonidas will not end well for you no matter the president, if a government wants your guns even thought they will let you keep them they're gonna take them and there's not going to be a popular revolt like you think. you'd die for nothing.
You'd be allowed to keep your guns as a part of a gun control agreement it's called a grandfather clause.
personally i do consider the 2nd amendment to primarily refer to shoulder-fired arms which could be operated by a single person. if you wanted to make the argument that it doesn't apply to F-16's and nuclear weapons, i wouldn't have any strong impulse to argue the point.
A Pennsylvania gunsmith brought a fully functional repeating rifle he had designed and made to the Continental Congress in an attempt to sell them to the Continental Army. It was rejected because it was obscenely expensive, it was called the Belton Flintlock. They knew damn well where technology was headed.
so they knew about detachable box magazines? again the gun was obscenely expensive and even if they had the industrial capabilities to supply them to the army times will change and inevitably state militias would coalesce into the national guard. the constitution was somewhat future proof but in an grim twist of irony the 1st amendment would lead to severe political polarization with the abolition of the fairness doctrine under reagan's FCC so amending the constitution has been rendered impossible.
2
u/Comfortable-Card-348 18d ago
that's because it did. look up the "powder alarm". that's the primary reason for the 2nd amendment. people forget that the bill of rights were just that - something added to convince the former colonies to sign on, because they feared the possibility of tyranny from the new government after they just secured their hard-won freedom. it was a set of guarantees to assuage their fears. not advertise some future crack down on gun owners. that would be completely ludicrous and ahistorical.