Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BrownArmy" data-source="post: 1358444" data-attributes="member: 18225">Soooo, did they not know it right away, since the 2nd Amendment is...an amendment?I&#039;m not trying to start a fight, but I&#039;m confused about the strict Constitutionalists that say that the Constitution isn&#039;t a living and breathing document, and then cling to the Amendments as if they were part and parcel of the original Constitution.There is the mechanism within our Founding documents to amend the Constitution, and rightfully so.The Second Amendment is one of the shortest Amendments (in terms of words)...is it time and place specific vis-a-vis a certain stress of the time?&nbsp; Or is that short verbiage meant to be the end-all of the Constitutions&#039; conversation about guns?&nbsp; Did the writers of the Second Amendment make it purposefully vague, and if so, why?Many books have been written about these two words:&nbsp; &quot;...well-regulated...&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BrownArmy, post: 1358444, member: 18225"] Soooo, did they not know it right away, since the 2nd Amendment is...an amendment? I'm not trying to start a fight, but I'm confused about the strict Constitutionalists that say that the Constitution isn't a living and breathing document, and then cling to the Amendments as if they were part and parcel of the original Constitution. There is the mechanism within our Founding documents to amend the Constitution, and rightfully so. The Second Amendment is one of the shortest Amendments (in terms of words)...is it time and place specific vis-a-vis a certain stress of the time? Or is that short verbiage meant to be the end-all of the Constitutions' conversation about guns? Did the writers of the Second Amendment make it purposefully vague, and if so, why? Many books have been written about these two words: "...[I]well-regulated[/I]..." [/QUOTE]

Verification