There are many debates over the second amendment. There are many people over the years that have been trying to degrade what the second amendment stands for. People like to say that it was made so that you could hunt animals; as a way to provide food for your table. People even say that the second amendment is no longer valid because it is so old. There are those that say that the second amendment should have limits on it. This is just another excuse for people to try and get rid of the second amendment.
Let me address the hunting commentary. If you study the actual text from the constitution it states, "In order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers." This cancels out the argument that the second amendment is just for hunting. The 27 amendments were formed so that the government does not overstep their boundaries and the people have the majority of the power. This means that the founding fathers were more worried about protecting the people from an overreaching government.
There are those that think like Mike Seidman (a Georgetown professor) that think, "It just doesn't make any sense, I don't think, to have a document that is as important as the Constitution as entrenched as it is given the fact that the world changes." These people think that the Constitution itself is so old that we can't use it anymore even though it is the framework of our country - the basis for our laws. Even though the times have changed the rights that this document, this framework, affords us are very applicable and haven't gone away. If you start to modify our current Constitution just with the thought that it needs updating you chip away at the original intentions behind the original thought processes that produced it. One has to remember that our founding fathers lived in time where they were breaking away from a tyrannical king and government - they had concerns that they were addressing via the Constitution to create a government that was ruled by the people, for the people.
Many politicians think that at the very least we need to put limits on the second amendment. These politicians say that we need to ban ar-15 and assault rifles because, "they are excessive force and are not necessary to neutralize a target." If ar-15's and other higher caliber weapons are banned then the only people that have them are the military and the people that can get those guns illegally. That would put us in a position where the government could just come in and take our weapons and we would be helpless and would have to stand aside as it happened. I would like to point out that the majority of these politicians like to throw around and use loosely the "fully automatic" terminology - the average citizen cannot purchase a "fully automatic" weapon without special licensure and additional fees.
My final thoughts are that we should not change the second amendment now and in the future. Our founding fathers put in place this amendment to secure the right of the people to protect themselves, to defend themselves, to stand against anyone (whether that is an individual, a group, or a government) that are perceived as a threat. Changing the document or even manipulating the verbage could have catastrophic results. Remember, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is the trilogy that our founding fathers wanted to secure.
What do you think of politicians trying to change the second amendment?
I think that they should leave the second amendment alone because if they change it in a drastic way it could tip the power into the government's hands even more and then we the people are hopeless to stand against them.
What do you think about Mike Seidman (a professor that teaches students) sharing his opinion with students?
I think that Mike should not be allowed to share his opinion so openly just because it swings these kids into thinking the way he thinks and also it doesn't let the students think for themselves.
For more on the article click here.
Replies
Very well thought out summary and great job replying back to people as well!! -10 late one day
I agree with you, I think that they should leave the second amendment alone because I think that it would make people extremely mad. I think that you should be able to like state your opinion because he does have that right. However, I don't think that he should be able to persuade other students to believe in what he does.
I agree the people wiill riot and protest and many people will lose their jobs. I also agree that if you are a teacher you can't teach your opinon to students.
I disagree i do not think that the 2nd amendment should be changed. this amendment was made a while ago and it should stay the same because if we got to change one amendment a lot of people will argue to change another amendment. I do not think that Mike Seidman should be allowed to share his thoughts with his students because that could change a student's mind and not let them think for themselves.
I don't think that the amendment should be chaged because it has worked for us so far. I think that teachers should not share their opinon and that students should not listen to the teacher.
I do not think that the second amendment should be changed. Yes, this right was made a long time ago, but if we changed every law that was made a long time ago we wouldn't really have any constant law. I do think that Mike Seidman is allowed to share his thoughts with his students as long as his students are still thinking for themselves.
I agree with you the 2nd amendment worked out for our founding fathers and they kept this country so it should not be changed. I think that his students as they have young minds they could easily persuaded.
I completely disagree with changing the 2nd ammendment. It would be unbelivable if this actually happened. In my opinion, there would never be enough votes for this to pass. Instead of changing everything I think people that sell guns should be more thorough when doing background checks and mental illness. I think Mike should have kept his opinion, as should every other teacher. Teachers should not be able to push their beliefs on their students. It sways the students opinions and keeps them from having a mind of their own.
I agree with you on both points and I think that the 2nd amendment has worked for us so far and if it is changed it might completely change America. I think that teachers should keep their opinons to themselves and they should not share with their students.
I do not agree with the politicians that are trying to change the second amendment. I also don't think that the amendment can be changed. There will never be enough votes to change the amendment in my opinion. I also think that if they change the second amendment there will be an increase in gun traficking and illegal gun activity.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 5 Next