The way I see it, people who deprive others of their rights (ie- criminals) are volunteering to have their own rights taken, including their right to bear arms. Though I do support providing them the ability to regain those rights if/when they have been rehabilitated. And no, I don't know to objectively determine when that is... its a problem that needs worked out. No one, including the mentally ill, should have any of their rights restricted outside of due process (because doing so is criminal). If someone is determined to be a threat to others by a judge/jury, after having been provided the opportunity to defend themselves with council in court, and the court determines they are unfit to exercize certain rights because they are a credible danger to others, it would be just to restrict them (though they should really be put in a mental hospital, which we first need a lot more of). I honestly can't say it would be worthy because that is basically pre-crime, but it would be just.
https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/amendment-ii/interps/99 Interesting article.
According to the FBI's 2017 crime stats: Knives or cutting instruments: 1591 Blunt objects (clubs, etc): 467 Rifles: 403 https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u....17/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11.xls
Sadly, there are too many examples of people NOT following those three rules. It shouldn't be hard to follow those rules but clearly there are many morons who exist in this world.
Firearms also served to make self defense far more efficient, meaning physical strength and conditioning was rendered obsolete, and the physically strongest could no longer maintain a monopoly on force over others.
Such can ultimately never be known for certain. Primarily because the human race conducts itself in a manner that suggests killing itself off is ingrained into its very DNA. Out of all species on the planet, the human race is the only creature that demonstrates an overwhelming desire to render itself extinct through whatever means possible. If firearms did not exist, or were not available, the killing would continue unabated with barely even a brief pause.
The second amendment to me is incredibly vague as to who is protected, the militias or citizens in general.
Saved. Unquestionably. http://www.politicalforum.com/index...r-100-000-defensive-gun-uses-per-year.572097/
There are many morons that get to drive cars. Have their own swimming pools, buy their own power tools, so on so forth. The only reason people want to you take away guns or bacon registration so they can take away guns and so the smart people can't have them.
