Cuomo calls for toughest assault weapon ban in the nation

reply to post by randomname


The problem with your argument is that you have to assume that those who wrote the Constitution were morons. They may not have foreseen every technological development that might occur, but certainly, they knew that technological advances could and probably would render the musket obsolete. It had happened in their past and they were aware that it likely would happen again. It seems certain that they would have wanted future citizens to have access to any technological advancements that might one day exist.

reply to post by IDKWTB



"HIGH CAPACITY" FIRE is "MODERN CONCEPT"... THINK AGAIN !

As GunIgnorants continue their blind attack on guns and their owners, a favorite target has been "high Capacity Magazines".

When the 2ND AMENDMENT and RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS... SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is rightfully interjected, the GunIgnorants always, ALWAYS say something to the tune of:

"Well, I'm sure our ForeFathers were talking about single shot muskets, not THESE "ASSAULT" RIFLES that can fire 30 "bullets"

Wrong.

High capacity, rapid fire WITH MUSKETS, is exactly what our ForeFathers strived for... and ACCOMPLISHED .

Our ForeFather's version of "Automatic" was multiple guns and a well trained wife and children who could reload the discharged firearm as fast as they were handed to them. This is a FACT.

Although, each musket required reloading after each shot, our ForeFathers compensated by lining up in rows, firing a volley of perhaps 30 to 100 rounds at once, then moving backwards to reload while another line replaced then and fired, etc.

"High Capacity Fire" was standard proceedure in both the "cabin" and battlefield.

Therefore, to claim "our ForeFathers were not thinking of a weapon that can fire 30 shots without reloading" is quite incorrect. Our ForeFathers were not only thinking and practicing the concept of "High Capacity" and Volley Fire, they were searching for ways they could INCREASE it.

VASCOPOLIS