5 ms·

I don't think the founding fathers envisioned ak47s or ar15s either.

by nso95 12y ago

GauntletWizard 12y ago
The founding fathers, who in their time saw and used the potential for sharpshooters with Rifles to engage many-times larger forces using inaccurate muskets, never envisioned that longer-range, more accurate, faster-rate of fire weapons would exist?
- bcg1 12y ago
  Not only that, most of the framers of the Constitution likely had high quality classical liberal arts education, not the watered down public school training that exists in USA today. To think that they never thought about how technology might advance is almost laughable. It is silly to assume that just because the technology didn't exist yet, that it would be impossible for them to conceive of it. "Supposing, for instance, that the fundamental relations of pitched sounds in the science of harmony and of musical composition were susceptible of such expression and adaptations, the engine might compose elaborate and scientific pieces of music of any degree of complexity or extent." - Ada Lovelace, 1842
ArcticCelt 12y ago
Nor the internet and television when they wrote the first amendment. I find it odd that that judgement gave such importance to the technology available at the time of writing the amendment instead of the spirit of it.
angersock 12y ago
Yet, thank whatever you hold dear, the common interpretation of the second amendment has held that the technology involved is that required for a militia of reasonable effectiveness, and as such it's kept pace with modern developments. The court specifically points out that such tazers are not militarily useful, and as such you don't get that same guarantee.
- fleitz 12y ago
  The SCOTUS specifically addresses 'military' weapons in Heller. This is going down in flames.
bpodgursky 12y ago
The founding fathers envisioned a militia which could counter and if necessary overthrow a standing army. They unquestionably envisioned a militia having all weapons that the army had.
- fleitz 12y ago
  And hopefully some the army didn't.
- themartorana 12y ago
  This, in so many ways. If you want to espouse what the Founding Fathers envisioned, then put yourself in the shoes of someone who just led a fledgling populace to a bloody victory over an oppressive monarchy half-way across the world. The Battles of Lexington and Concord were preceded by a secret British order to confiscate and destroy the military supplies (rifles, ammo, cannons) of the militia that had been formed following tensions between Patriots and the British after the Boston Tea Party. [0] So the very first act of military aggression - and the "shot heard round the world" - was at least in part the last resort of the militia after a failed attempt to confiscate guns. So when someone considers what the Founding Fathers actually envisioned, it is absolutely that the people of the United States always be able to stand up to a standing army. We can argue the current practicality of citizens owning nukes, but that doesn't remove the spirit of the amendment. [0] http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Lexington_and_Concord http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Lexington_and_Conc...
tedks 12y ago
An AR-15 is just a semiautomatic rifle, so the founding fathers basically had AR-15's. And I would find it very hard to believe that, given the notion of guns, a reasonably intelligent person wouldn't expand the concept to a gun that fires repeatedly.
- iends 12y ago
  "An AR-15 is just a semiautomatic rifle, so the founding fathers basically had AR-15's" Wait, what? Not really an expert on 18th century weaponry, but even I know from grade school that the best weapons of that era were muzzle loaded which significantly impacts the number of rounds you can fire per unit of time. So I googled... An AR-15 can fire 45 rounds per minute. A Pennsylvania Long Rifle from that era could approximately fire 1 round per minute.
  - codezero 12y ago
    Well, our population is almost 100x what it was back then too, so at scale, we're able to kill less people! :P
  - 15155 12y ago
    How about weapons that DID exist? Private citizens owned the vast majority of the US's naval power. Namely: a substantial amount of cannonry, mortars, etc. These primitive weapons have (and had) the capability of razing cities. Were the rockets' red glare and bombs bursting in air imaginary? No, but the home-teams' were privately owned.
    - iends 12y ago
      "Were the rockets' red glare and bombs bursting in air imaginary? No, but the home-teams' were privately owned." The star-spangled banner was written in 1814 during the War of 1812, which is definitely not the 18th century. Fort McHenry was also commanded by the US Army and not a state's militia, so it's not clear who owned the cannons.
      - 12y ago
mason240 12y ago
They didn't envision telegraphs, telephones, or the internet, but I doubt you think that the first amendment doesn't apply them.
15155 12y ago
Your comment adds no substance to the thread. The highest court in the land has already ruled that individuals have the right to possess firearms in common use. The vision or intent of the founding fathers, is, quite frankly, irrelevant at this juncture. Also: many accounts (specifically, the Federalist papers) would disagree with the "oh! but they never imagined it!" argument. But, for the sake of argument, you do realize almost all of the then-standing naval fleet and their weaponry (specifically: cannons) were privately owned? At that point in time, it was completely acceptable (as a private citizen) to own weaponry that could completely level structures.
Evolved 12y ago
The founding fathers were some incredibly smart gentlemen and had already invented and innovated quite a few things so as they had already witnessed and created so much already you can bet your bottom dollar they thought and knew that things such as firearms, media, etc. would undoubtedly become very complex and powerful [1]. [1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2011/07/03/the-five-best-inventions-of-the-founding-fathers/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2011/07/03/the-five-be...
brandonmenc 12y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_Air_Rifle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_Air_Rifle Created in 1779, first repeating rifle, 20-30 shot magazine, high rate of fire. Basically, a machine gun. Certainly a harbinger of things to come. Invented before the Constitution was written.

I don't think the founding fathers envisioned ak47s or ar15s either.

by nso95 12y ago

I don't think the founding fathers envisioned ak47s or ar15s either.

The founding fathers, who in their time saw and used the potential for sharpshooters with Rifles to engage many-times larger forces using inaccurate muskets, never envisioned that longer-range, more accurate, faster-rate of fire weapons would exist?

bcg1 12y ago
Not only that, most of the framers of the Constitution likely had high quality classical liberal arts education, not the watered down public school training that exists in USA today. To think that they never thought about how technology might advance is almost laughable. It is silly to assume that just because the technology didn't exist yet, that it would be impossible for them to conceive of it. "Supposing, for instance, that the fundamental relations of pitched sounds in the science of harmony and of musical composition were susceptible of such expression and adaptations, the engine might compose elaborate and scientific pieces of music of any degree of complexity or extent." - Ada Lovelace, 1842

ArcticCelt 12y ago

Nor the internet and television when they wrote the first amendment. I find it odd that that judgement gave such importance to the technology available at the time of writing the amendment instead of the spirit of it.

angersock 12y ago

Yet, thank whatever you hold dear, the common interpretation of the second amendment has held that the technology involved is that required for a militia of reasonable effectiveness, and as such it's kept pace with modern developments. The court specifically points out that such tazers are not militarily useful, and as such you don't get that same guarantee.

fleitz 12y ago
The SCOTUS specifically addresses 'military' weapons in Heller. This is going down in flames.

bpodgursky 12y ago

The founding fathers envisioned a militia which could counter and if necessary overthrow a standing army. They unquestionably envisioned a militia having all weapons that the army had.

fleitz 12y ago
And hopefully some the army didn't.
themartorana 12y ago
This, in so many ways. If you want to espouse what the Founding Fathers envisioned, then put yourself in the shoes of someone who just led a fledgling populace to a bloody victory over an oppressive monarchy half-way across the world. The Battles of Lexington and Concord were preceded by a secret British order to confiscate and destroy the military supplies (rifles, ammo, cannons) of the militia that had been formed following tensions between Patriots and the British after the Boston Tea Party. [0] So the very first act of military aggression - and the "shot heard round the world" - was at least in part the last resort of the militia after a failed attempt to confiscate guns. So when someone considers what the Founding Fathers actually envisioned, it is absolutely that the people of the United States always be able to stand up to a standing army. We can argue the current practicality of citizens owning nukes, but that doesn't remove the spirit of the amendment. [0] http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Lexington_and_Concord http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Lexington_and_Conc...

tedks 12y ago

An AR-15 is just a semiautomatic rifle, so the founding fathers basically had AR-15's. And I would find it very hard to believe that, given the notion of guns, a reasonably intelligent person wouldn't expand the concept to a gun that fires repeatedly.

iends 12y ago
"An AR-15 is just a semiautomatic rifle, so the founding fathers basically had AR-15's" Wait, what? Not really an expert on 18th century weaponry, but even I know from grade school that the best weapons of that era were muzzle loaded which significantly impacts the number of rounds you can fire per unit of time. So I googled... An AR-15 can fire 45 rounds per minute. A Pennsylvania Long Rifle from that era could approximately fire 1 round per minute.
- codezero 12y ago
  Well, our population is almost 100x what it was back then too, so at scale, we're able to kill less people! :P
- 15155 12y ago
  How about weapons that DID exist? Private citizens owned the vast majority of the US's naval power. Namely: a substantial amount of cannonry, mortars, etc. These primitive weapons have (and had) the capability of razing cities. Were the rockets' red glare and bombs bursting in air imaginary? No, but the home-teams' were privately owned.
  - iends 12y ago
    "Were the rockets' red glare and bombs bursting in air imaginary? No, but the home-teams' were privately owned." The star-spangled banner was written in 1814 during the War of 1812, which is definitely not the 18th century. Fort McHenry was also commanded by the US Army and not a state's militia, so it's not clear who owned the cannons.
    - 12y ago

mason240 12y ago

They didn't envision telegraphs, telephones, or the internet, but I doubt you think that the first amendment doesn't apply them.

15155 12y ago

Your comment adds no substance to the thread. The highest court in the land has already ruled that individuals have the right to possess firearms in common use. The vision or intent of the founding fathers, is, quite frankly, irrelevant at this juncture. Also: many accounts (specifically, the Federalist papers) would disagree with the "oh! but they never imagined it!" argument. But, for the sake of argument, you do realize almost all of the then-standing naval fleet and their weaponry (specifically: cannons) were privately owned? At that point in time, it was completely acceptable (as a private citizen) to own weaponry that could completely level structures.

Evolved 12y ago

The founding fathers were some incredibly smart gentlemen and had already invented and innovated quite a few things so as they had already witnessed and created so much already you can bet your bottom dollar they thought and knew that things such as firearms, media, etc. would undoubtedly become very complex and powerful [1]. [1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2011/07/03/the-five-best-inventions-of-the-founding-fathers/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2011/07/03/the-five-be...

brandonmenc 12y ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_Air_Rifle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_Air_Rifle Created in 1779, first repeating rifle, 20-30 shot magazine, high rate of fire. Basically, a machine gun. Certainly a harbinger of things to come. Invented before the Constitution was written.