Quote:
|
Originally Posted by HarrySchell
Possession of cannon and Apache helos by an individual, as frivolously imagined by some people I have talked with, are outsized arms compared to the fundamental intent of 2A,
|
I disagree.
Outside of the 2nd Amendment itself, the contemporaneous writings of the Founders on the topic of the 2nd Amendment clearly indicate that what they had in mind was "all the terrible implements of the soldier" (Tench Coxe), and that the militia (that is to say, the People) were to be armed sufficiently so as to be stronger than any standing army. Back then, that meant cannon. Today, that means full-auto portable arms, tanks, Bradley Fighting Vehicles, Apache gunships, and the most advanced fighter aircraft the Navy and Air Force have got.
Yeah, I know they won't let me park a fully-armed Apache in the garage, but that IS what the 2nd Amendment means. And always has meant.