countryclubjoe
Regular Member
Had the founders simply added the words "for self defense" in the 2nd amendment there would be no ambiguity..
While the amendment seems crystal clear to us, 21st century jurist trying to interpret the language of a law from the 18th century causes problems..
Hence why did the best and brightest of their day not add the term " for self defense" in the amendment?..
I believe the concept was so basic and natural that the Fathers simply did not feel the need to articulate such an inalienable right in the text.. Therefore we need to study the long forgotten 9th amendment, I call it the common sense amendment, the amendment that covers all natural rights that are so basic they were omitted from the original contents of the constitution IE, right to privacy, right to associate, right to travel, right to express ones self via letters or speech or art.. and yes, ' for self defense of ones self and family and loved ones".. It would be unchristian like to leave ourself and our family at the mercy of those that wise to do us harm.
My .02
While the amendment seems crystal clear to us, 21st century jurist trying to interpret the language of a law from the 18th century causes problems..
Hence why did the best and brightest of their day not add the term " for self defense" in the amendment?..
I believe the concept was so basic and natural that the Fathers simply did not feel the need to articulate such an inalienable right in the text.. Therefore we need to study the long forgotten 9th amendment, I call it the common sense amendment, the amendment that covers all natural rights that are so basic they were omitted from the original contents of the constitution IE, right to privacy, right to associate, right to travel, right to express ones self via letters or speech or art.. and yes, ' for self defense of ones self and family and loved ones".. It would be unchristian like to leave ourself and our family at the mercy of those that wise to do us harm.
My .02