I hope this isn’t out of context, also I don’t want to “own the libs” or something here, I’m actually interested.

  • Delphia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    3 months ago

    Because when the constitution was written there were 4 million “Americans” there are now 331 million.

    When the constitution was written, it took 30 seconds to reload a single shot musket that had a maximum effective range of 100 yards. An AR15 can dump a 30 round magazine as fast as you can pull the trigger, be reloaded in 3 seconds, can hit targets out as far as someone can realistically see.

    The problem with the rights is that they no longer function as intended. When they were written 20 civilian men with muskets was not significantly less dangerous than 20 soldiers with muskets, the idea that the people could stand up to a tyranical government was sound. Its not anymore. I dont care how well organised your anti-govt militia is the ATF or FBI could fuck you up without much trouble if you wanted to try them.

    I say this as someone who thinks going shooting is enormously fun, I love the engineering, science and talent involved in it as a pursuit. But those “rights” mean mass shootings of innocent people dont even make the mainstream news half the time.

    • shotgunpulse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      The idea was obviously that the citizens would have the same gear as the government. Many soldiers even bought and brought civilian rifles when the government’s rifles were getting outdated.

      The fact that FBI and the ATF could fuck people up doesn’t mean the people should be disarmed, rather it says those agencies should be dissolved IMO…

    • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      The problem with the rights is that they no longer function as intended. When they were written 20 civilian men with muskets was not significantly less dangerous than 20 soldiers with muskets, the idea that the people could stand up to a tyranical government was sound. Its not anymore. I dont care how well organised your anti-govt militia is the ATF or FBI could fuck you up without much trouble if you wanted to try them.

      This is actually an argument for why We The People need civilian A-10 Thunderbolt 2s, HIMARS, and Javelins, etc, not an argument for why we shouldn’t have rights anymore.

    • evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Look how with all of our sophisticated technology, we lost the war in Vietnam (and the surrounding countries we did war crimes in), and we lost the war in Afghanistan. Greater technology doesn’t always win, so even the level of arms we can legally obtain could still win a war.

      The other thing to consider is that at the time the constitution was written, a single shot musket was not the pinnacle of weapons technology a private citizen could own. You could have a fully armed warship. It’s not a good argument to lean on the intention of the founding fathers, because at that time, you could privately own a ship capable of leveling a coastal city. Personally, I think their opinion doesn’t matter, anyway, cause they also intended for slavery to exist.

    • Garbanzo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      the idea that the people could stand up to a tyranical government was sound. Its not anymore. I dont care how well organised your anti-govt militia is the ATF or FBI could fuck you up without much trouble if you wanted to try them.

      The Taliban and the IRA would disagree with that assessment

    • SupraMario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      That’s like saying the 1st should be abolished because they didn’t know about the Internet. It’s a terrible argument.