No, they could have certainly put restrictions on it like many civilized countries do. And then we’d have mass shootings every decade instead of every 11 days. And we wouldn’t have to constantly have talks with our kids about staying alive at school.
n[quote=“CaughtInTheMiddle, post:128, topic:41627”]
No, they could have certainly put restrictions on it like many civilized countries do. And then we’d have mass shootings every decade instead of every 11 days. And we wouldn’t have to constantly have talks with our kids about staying alive at school.
[/quote]
Maybe that was based on the silly idea of establishing a free society, realizing individual rights are paramount in that regard and understanding restriction of those rights in a vein effort to thwart the nefarious acts of a few is pretty much the antithesis to the whole idea. Otherwise, they may have penned the end of first amendment to read “…unless people think they will find comfort in restricting such rights”
You never know who with a gun is going to snap. The more guns we have out there the more likely they are in the hands of someone that snaps. The more likely instances like these occur.
I never claimed they achieved perfection. Slavery was certainly one area where the ideal was compromised in the face of reality. But, I don’t see how the misdeed of compromising on slavery in any way validates the idea of further compromising on individual rights.
Come to think of it…I can remember another politician being lambasted for calling illegal aliens a danger and there are several examples of illegals murdering people. I guess that puts those two politicians and there statements on the same level huh.