General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I'm all for a total ban on semi-automatic guns [View all]Hugabear
(10,340 posts)The 2nd Amendment merely refers to "arms". It does not state "firearms", "guns", or any other specific word.
Gungeoneers will tell you that 'well, you can tell what the Founding Fathers meant by reading some of their other works, it was generally accepted at the time this is what arms meant, blah blah blah'. That may be fine and dandy, but we have to go with what is actually written in the Constitution - not by what we think they meant. This is why you can get differing opinions from the SCOTUS, and why SCOTUS judges can go back and overrule previous SCOTUS rulings. Especially when you're dealing with language as vague as the 2nd Amendment.
But if you were to go with the most loosely based libertarian interpretation of the Constitution - then there would be absolutely nothing at all the US government could do to restrict private ownership of tanks, RPG's, missiles, grenades, bombs, armed drones, etc - after all, these are all considered "arms".
Fact of the matter is that we DO rely on a sensible interpretation of the 2nd Amendment so that ordinary civilians do not have access to military-grade weaponry.