Without arms, we would still be subjects of British Crown
A Feb. 21 letter writer suggested that our Second Amendment is outdated because at the time it was written, muzzle loaders were the only guns available. While this is true, governments and other entities had only these weapons available. Shouldn’t the same weapons that a tyrannical government may use against its citizens (and don’t say this won’t happen because we are America; remember Kent State, anyone?) be available to those citizens to defend themselves?
Much of the purpose of the Second Amendment is to empower the people against a tyrannical government. This may be backed up by quotes from Washington, Jefferson and many other of our founders. Without arms, we would all still be subjects of the British Crown.
No law will remove guns from existence. The only way guns are going away is when they become obsolete. People who intend to harm others will always find ways to obtain firearms. Shouldn’t the whole of society be able to protect itself from these people if they desire?
I’m not saying we shouldn’t have laws preventing people who have violent histories from owning guns. We already have laws to stop this. Errors in the administration of these laws are responsible for most of the mass shootings. Let’s perfect enforcement of existing laws before making new ones!