{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
5/28/2014 11:11:19 PM
10
-
I'm as pro-gun as the next guy, but that was written two centuries ago. We have to make laws for the modern world, and sometimes change is needed.
-
Edited by SuperSmeller: 5/28/2014 11:30:21 PMwhat changes need to be made to the first amendment? or fourth? fifth? "shall not be infringed" is pretty clear.
-
None? Because free speech is a basic human right that is essential for a democracy?
-
so then why does the second amendment need updating?
-
Because there may come to be a change to our culture or technology that makes it a big problem? I don't think it should be altered now, but you have to look down the road and consider that you do not, and cannot, know all the possibilities.
-
what about "shall not be infringed" is confusing?
-
It's not confusing. I know what it means. What you don't seem to understand is we can change and strike down amendments if they start to cause problems. The Founding Fathers were smart enough to know this and allow us to make changes to the constitution as needed.
-
yes, but not a single part of the bill of rights has been changed. what makes the other amendments fine, but the second amendment could need work? i don't see how "shall not be infringed" could ever be misconstrued
-
The second amendment is fine for now. I think it's great! But things can change and we always have to remember that.
-
Technically, it doesn't need to be changed. The whole "open to interpretation" thing and all. If people can still own guns (or 'arm'aments), then nothing is infringed upon.
