Really? How do you know what the Founders could have imagined? Being that they didn’t spend hours watching mind numbing television and lived during the Age of Enlightenment, it is quite possible that their imaginations were better that ours.

The Girandoni repeating air rifle was in use by the Austrian army at the time of the writing of the Constitution. It could fire 30 consecutive shots without reloading. Lewis and Clark used the Girandoni rifle in demonstrations. So a 30 round magazine is not necessarily a new concept.

Regardless of the Founders imagination capabilities, the intent behind the 2nd amendment, as others have pointed out, was for the citizens to have comparable arms to the military so that they could defend themselves if the government and/or military became corrupt and tyrannical.

And to those who say the citizens could never stand a chance against the military, that argument is without merit. There are 1.4 million active service members in all branches of the military combined. There are over 4 million members of the NRA alone and millions of gun owners with similar beliefs in freedom that are not members of the NRA. If 1% of the American population of over 300 million decided to rise up against the government, the military would be outnumbered 2 to 1. The military may have better technology, but they would be overwhelmed in numbers. With all the military technology, territory is still taken by ground forces. With superior technology our forces and the Russians both failed in Afghanistan against primitive fighters. And just look at what the Egyptians are doing with no arms. So, just because the government has better weapons does not guarantee them victory in a conflict.

I’m sure he means well, but he seems to have called upon Congress to make laws which violate the wording of the Constitution, specifically the Bill of Rights.

What if some future president decided to build upon that precedent and say that the rest of the Bill of Rights was too dangerous to be followed literally?

After all, some people will use their freedom of speech to work people up into killing mobs.
Shouldn’t people be forced to prove they will only speak in favor of the government?

Some religions teach things opposed to what the government allows.
Shouldn’t only religions in agreement with the actions of the government be allowed? Even if 55% agreed they should?

Some newspapers report things which embarrass government servants.
Shouldn’t the press be limited to only reporting what is comfortable?

Some people are so obviously guilty that 90% are sure of their guilt as reported by the government or the papers.
Shouldn’t we simply throw out their right to trial by jury?

All rights in the Bill of Rights can be abused.
Should the rights be curtailed?

Consider the thought that your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. If you haven’t hit my nose, I shouldn’t gripe about your silly swings.

Remember all laws should written as if they will be enforced by our worst enemies, because they might be.

David for reconsidering “just do something”
and taking the long view

No K.S. the same day the CT shooting happened, a man in China cut 20 children with a knife . . . . . no one died, all those children went home to their parents with cuts, there’s a big difference and the TRUTH still does matter.

If guns aren’t the problem and ONLY people are, do we need to start profiling adult white males? They seem to be at the center of most of these mass shootings. Do you see how easily it is to turn that racial profile foolishness on its head when you’re suddenly the group under scrutiny!

I’m glad our President did something. If we waited for a Republican President to move forward it would never happen. The founders of the Constitution never could have imagined that we would one day be capable of producing a gun that could fire 100 musketballs in a few seconds.

We have sensible modern day interpretations of all the other amendments but when it comes to the Second Amendment, its like we lose our perspective on reality. Gun regulation does NOT mean gun abolition, but finding one, purchasing one should be more difficult than buying a box of candy and guns owners need to be held responsible for the misuse and misapplication of the guns they own! If someone steals your gun or a kid finds it, that’s your fault and you need to suffer the consequences!