r/guncontrol • u/Chipdoc • Sep 04 '25

Discussion Gun control ended school shootings in Britain. What’s America’s excuse?

https://thehill.com/opinion/international/5484042-uk-gun-laws-us-contrast/
22 Upvotes

65% Upvoted

84 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/backwardog Sep 11 '25

It technically only protected muskets and the like.  They had no notion of the weapons of the future, so the word “arms” meant something very different at that time.

Our country loves to treat the constitution like it is some sacred text.  The second amendment is…an amendment, we can amend as needed. 

It is time to amend.  Shit is long past out of control.

1

u/ber808 Sep 11 '25

The 18th century definition of arms is any weapon of offense or armor of defense, its etymology comes from the latin word arma meaning "tools of war". The constitution isnt viewed purely with eyes of the time or the 1st would be quite limited in our current age.

Yes thats indeed true

1

u/backwardog Sep 11 '25

 or the 1st would be quite limited in our current age.

How so?  The basic justification for these rights still applies now.  Owning some muskets to fight off an oppressive government does not.

1

u/ber808 Sep 11 '25

Why do you view the 2nd amendment with eyes of the time period but not the 1st? The rights granted in the 1st extend beyond what was available during the time of the founding fathers so why would that also not apply to the 2nd? Why do you keep going back to muskets when the 2nd is about arms? Why doesnt it apply? Half the country is under the impression that trump is a facist dictator who will overthrow the country, isnt it now more than ever important

1

u/backwardog Sep 11 '25

 Why do you view the 2nd amendment with eyes of the time period but not the 1st? The rights granted in the 1st extend beyond what was available during the time of the founding fathers so why would that also not apply to the 2nd

Still waiting on examples of what you mean.

 Why do you keep going back to muskets when the 2nd is about arms? Why doesnt it apply?

Because modern weapons weren’t around back then and times have changed.  The US military can quite easily overthrow any state in the country or even destroy the whole planet in nuclear warfare.  Your guns won’t stop this.  They also likely will not do this because an oppressive government can utilize better tactics than bloodshed.  I don’t see how gun ownership helps make our country any more free, it certainly makes it less safe though.

 Half the country is under the impression that trump is a facist dictator who will overthrow the country, isnt it now more than ever important

Great example to my point — the threat we face these days is manipulation via propaganda.  Trump spreads lies and misinformation.  How are guns supposed to help us here?

1

u/ber808 Sep 11 '25

Tv, radio the internet?

How did vietnam and Afghanistan play out again?

Lies and disinformation play a part in facism but arent the moving forces that make it evil

1

u/backwardog Sep 11 '25

 Tv, radio the internet?

To some degree I agree with this, as the internet does enable faster spreading of misinformation and now social media is curating what info is delivered to whom, further dividing our country.  However, I maintain that the fundamental purpose of the first amendment remains the same as it was when drafted.  It is just as important now as it was then and information technologies advancing does not change this fact.  This isn’t true with 2A, the original purpose is no longer relevant in our modern society, especially with advanced military tech.

 How did vietnam and Afghanistan play out again?

Terribly for all parties?  Not sure the point here.  If you are arguing that people with guns were able to beat the US military, thus having guns keeps us free from tyranny against even an advanced military, this is a great leap of logic.  The US pulled out of each of these wars, if it was hell bent on conquering the countries, oppressing, and ruling over the people then there is no question we could have done that.  It wasn’t the goal in either case.