I'm not claiming to have the answer to that. And TBH I'm not 100% sure how I feel about either idea you presented. I am sure though that I feel we should continue to hold our Constitution to be the final arbiter of the people's rights vs the Federal Government. What really scares me is a day when we start ignoring inconvenient parts and calling them outdated a la England and the right to own guns.
The second is just a convenient pivot point. There are people today who would love to be able to simply change the way we do things to better suit their agenda. The Senate & filibusters are another good example.
I'm not saying filibusters are good, but nor should Harry Reid get to just change it to how he wants it to operate.
and see, that's the problem, because final is the absolute wrong word. People treat this thing like a holy text, when both are completely fallible. The entire point of the constitution is that it has baked-in error--being that it is the work of humans, placed in one era, who realized that the situations of one era will, at some point, be completely irrelevant to another.
There are laws that are understood to be universal truths, and will likely never be touched, of course, and many that are up for, and have been, revised. Many believe that the 2nd is one of these universal truths (right to protection), and I'm not sure I disagree with that, but I also see the very real problem that the intent of the amendment is more or less obsolete in our current era.
Now, I honestly don't think the 2nd should be repealed, or even touched, really. I'm just saying that defending it is not as easy as people want to think--well, as soon as one pulls their fingers out of their ears and stops chatting LALALALA and actually thinks for a second, the problems can be discerned.
Chiefly, as far as a tool to "protect our democracy": Every other example of a developed democratic nation in this world has a thriving, protected democracy without armed citizens.
(People like to throw in Switzerland as an example of a nation that, without guns, would never be neutral. These people are idiots who have never been to Switzerland: The entire country is a freaking mountain fortress. You've got max fortified bunkers outfitted with howitzers pointing across all sides of the border. You've got military and defense infrastructure built below all major civilian infrastructure in the main cities. People don't invade Switzerland because people aren't stupid)
Facebook
Twitter