When the second amendment was penned, people owned flintlocks.

[Dem2]

95. Even then the militias were a bunch of lazy drunks more likely to shoot each other vs. a perceived

enemy.

This is one place where a compromise at the last minute was a complete fuck-up. It's clear that today's society doesn't need this stupid provision and it should be stricken. Sadly, gun coddlers will never let this happen, but we can at least try to minimize the damage whereas we can limit the weapons to hunting and self-defense with limited, possibly non-removable magazines (worked for the militiamen back in the day! One shot, baby!) I'm perfectly happy with my revolver for self-defense - the odds of me ever having to use it are millions to one anyway. Hunters generally only need one round chambered to hit a prey. Specialty uses where men put themselves in dangerous situations in the wild can be dealt with through rentals or other temporary use of high-fire rate weapons.