Quote:
Originally Posted by piece-itpete
d-ray, of course! But cars kill far more (37,261 in 2008). Different? Yes. The Founders considered firearms important enough to protect in the Constitution - carriages didn't make it.
Pete
|
First, until a decision a year or so ago by the bushwhacked court disregarded long-standing limitations on the scope of the second amendment, that provision had been read to protect only the possession of firearms in the context of a well regulated militia. The bushwhacked court expended that protection to ownership of a firearm in the home for personal safety, but it did not expand it beyond that, noting the vaildity of restrictions on concealed carry and licensing restrictions - even licensing of firearms retained within one's home. No court has interpreted the second amendment to permit one to carry a saturday night special on ones back pocket, purse or glove compartment. The second amendment does not guarantee the right to pack a pistol whenever whereever one wants.
Second, I would expect that automobiles do much more to contribute to the nation's productive capacity than firearms do. They make it possible to save more lives; they make transportaion of foodstuffs reasonable; they deliver products; they improve security; they broaden opportunity. None of the intended purposes of automobiles include use as an instrument of death. Firearms, while they have recreational purposes, are designed to be capable of grievous bodily harm. Except on rare occasion, automobile deaths are accidental. Except on rare occasion, firearm deaths are intentional. Accordingly it is a red herring to compare the number of deaths in automobile accidents to deaths by firearms.
Regards,
D-Ray