General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Most gun violence in the US is not from mass shootings. Some truth and an honest question. [View all]letemrot
(184 posts)I am asking you to justify ridiculous views? No. I am asking if civilians had weapons of the same lethality as the military at the time the Constitution was drafted..( And then to ensure ratification they had to add the Bill of Rights and ensure that included the right to bear arms). You focused on 'cutting edge' in an attempt to be coy. i probably should have said comparable lethality (but the weapons were about the latest mass reproducible technology of the time). So you believe that founding fathers didnt anticipate advancements in weaponry? They didn't have concerns or foresee the rise of a possible tyrannical government? It wasn't that long ago; right here on DU people were speculating that Bush was looking for a way to declare martial law/suspend the elections to remain in power. We have President Obama right now.. But what if a power hungry RWNJ gets in?
"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms." Tench Coxe in "Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution." Under the pseudonym "A Pennsylvanian" in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 at 2 col. 1.
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined." Patrick Henry, 3 Elliot, Debates at 45 (Virginia Convention, June 5, 1788).
So yes.. "Laws written for muskets" still apply today. Regardless of whatever straw man you put up.