I think Ant's question is: why should
that in particular
be a right.
The constitution is not set in stone nor is it a religious text. It's not
inherently correct it is (or should be) a living document that is interpreted and revised by the supreme court and congress.
The second amendment says (this is the version ratified by the states, I realise the version passed by congress has commas in different places):
Quote:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
I know there's a lot of argument about this but to my mind that
quite clearly conditions gun ownership on belonging to a militia. At the very least it links the two, gun ownership being intended to protect a state's right to secede should the federal government become tyrannical. Not for fun or to compensate for a small penis nor even for personal protection.
And, to be fair, now that the federal government has aircraft carriers, fighter jets, apache helicopters, drones, guided missiles and ICBMs I don't really fancy your chances going up against that with a few AR-15s and pistols.
The right is archaic and needs either revising (to give the states Apaches and ICBMs) or removing.
Howfuckingever...
I, of course, realise that much of the territory which makes up your nation was won and protected with firearms. And that your country was established in a violent revolution against a tyrannical government which, had firearms not been widely available, would've been far less likely.
I understand that guns are hugely symbolically important in your culture and that is unlikely to change any time soon.
And the resentment caused by the sneering, snobbish way anti-gun people look down on pro-gun people probably does more for the pro-gun lobby than any of the constitutional or practical arguments.
Howdoublefuckingever...
To me (and I imagine many in other countries where guns laws are tighter) a gun is just a weapon for killing things, and I have no idea why you'd want to own such a thing , I find the idea quite abhorrent. Like if I wanted the right to stamp on puppies heads. Why? Because some men thought it'd be a good idea 200 years ago. Killing things is bad. Guns are for killing things. Why the
fuck would I want one?
These differences are deeply ingrained in our cultures, we're so diverged that we're barely even talking about the same thing, really. Which makes discussions like this all but pointless.
EDITED: 3 Oct 2014 17:06 by X3N0PH0N