\Unfortunately, your argument simply does not hold water in today's U.S. States have passed gun control measures and court decisions have upheld gun restrictions. What YOU or I or anyone else BELIEVES the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution says is meaningless. It is how the states and our court system interprets the Constitution and "no restrictions, period" does not hold.
The problem is when we as a citizens decide it is ok for someone, anyone to re-interpret the constitution. I don't need an anti-gunner to decide what is acceptable for a citizen to own. I don't want a pro-gunner to decide either. It was decided by those who drafted and passed the U.S. Constitution and does not need re-interpratation today.
The second amendmant does not dictate which arms, bow, arrow, musket, sword, dagger, uzi, semi-auto, or AR. The intent was, no restrictions, period ! Originally Posted by rioseco