I will start with this. Anyone who see's solving gun violence by taking up arms nationwide and making the US into a battery of sorts has a conflict of interest. The literal interpretation of the 2nd amendment is becoming such a cop-out as to why one should, can, will (?) carry a loaded rifle in thier car. if your hunting, have a license, and our ON your way to the range, fine. if you enjoy that, fantastic. Even that becomes questionable. Why can't the range supply guns and keep tabs on how long, were, and create return polcies, so there is absolutely no one rushing around with guns "hunting". we saw how good dick cheney is at hunting. Yikes. But i want to make the point that carrying a gun because you want to, becomes a little uneasy for those who don't.
Let's remember this amendment was made in the midst of the Revolutionary War. They made this amendment because they WERE not allowed one. if we transport back to that time, i can see why they would include this. King George wanted to stop them, and they thought he was oppressing thier new freedom. Okay. But im sure Alexander Hamilton maybe wasn't too happy about being shot in a duel. This amendment should have its reservations.
Tragedies like Sandy Hook, Aurora, Columbine, Virginia Tech, ect...are becoming two frequent. I have seen vidoes and facebook posts saying "let's arm the teachers, then only one life would be gone." Im sorry, lets look at the issue of how did he get a gun and why did he have a gun if he had mental health issues. Giving elementary school's gun and allowing that age children to become aquainted with guns and find that as the norm WOULD INTENSIFY the problem. We have 7 year olds accidentally shooting off guns they accidentally found in case a shooter came. i think bad idea. Then would we arm high schools? please no. Hormonal, confused teenagers who are mad about a breakup, a bad test, a misunderstanding, bullying (this list could go on) knowing guns are on campus. Im sure high school shootings of classmates or suicides would become much more frequent becasue of the INCREASED availablity.
i saw a fantastic little show a couple nights ago with a man saying that "if someone tries to take his gun away, he'll kill someone." ...what? That's wierd. If thats your response to moderation and basic common sense, maybe he never should have been allowed a gun. Why do people need guns at home? there is so many domestic accidents regarding guns, and that im going to say could probably be stopped by...hmm, not allowing guns as freely and as unrestrained as they are now.
Yes, its in the consitution. But im sure i can say with certainty, the founding fathers would not have condoned shooting massacres because of guns. They definitly weren't happy the british were "massacring" the Americans, they sure wouldn't like it now. In fact, im sure they would have thought we'd be a little more advanced then allowing citizens, mentally ill or not, banging guns around and say "wow, they sure are celebrating thier 2nd amendment rights. Good for them."