General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The Rude Pundit - Sorry, Gun Nuts: Hitler Actually Relaxed Most Gun Laws [View all]FBaggins
(28,703 posts)No doubt that reasonable people would oppose such an attempt to pass that kind of law. But that isn't the point.
The reason it's in the Constitution and not just an early law passed by the founders is that they didn't want the government to have the ability to pass such a law (without amending the Constitution)
It's not LOGICAL to conclude that the government is taking action here for any reason aside from a legitimate concern for public safety.
Well... sure it is. For the same reason that pro-choice defenders justifiably fear the slippery slope in legislation that they would otherwise have little problem with (surely parental notification laws are otherwise unobjectinable, no?)... but I agree with you. Public safety is clearly the primary concern here... but the principal under attack is whether or not government has the power to pass such laws - not whether or not the individual law is worthy of consideration.
There could be plenty of reasonable laws that restrict free speech. Laws that could be reasonable (and have pure motivations), but which are nevertheless unconstitutional. And we should be ready to defend the constitution and oppose such laws - no matter how reasonable they seem.