[pikatore]

Let's put it this way.

Gun control only strikes a chord with pro-gunners because it violates the second amendment. Problem is, not only are there plently of 'rights' and 'liberties' that the government has ALREADY restricted to the American public (just because it doesn't go bang, it doesn't mean it's not any less important), but the 2nd amendment is ITSELF used as an argument, as if it were some sort of law of nature.

However, it seems that certain people who have such an absolutist pro-gun view have to accept that such a view is not conducive to a healthy and safe society. What's safer, a safe community whereby the peace is kept because everyone has a handgun under thier pillow, or a community where peace is INSTILLED in the people through tight crime prevention, and education?

'Liberties' are important, but they are in no way necessary (in general) for a person to live a free and succesful life. Osbourne, before you jump on that comment, remember that enough 'liberties' you may have had in a totally lawless state are already restricted, and realise that you are still standing, and still have the freedom to do whatever you want, within reasonable grounds. That fact that each state has it's own little set of laws (which allows for countless exploits and interpretations) doesn't help the cohesion of the US itself as a whole, and that is something I think is a good idea. But that is a seperate point. I want to criticise the 2nd amendment itself.

The 2nd amendment ITSELF is being undermined by the very country it rules over, with different interpretations being made from it, and actual challenges made towards it. In fact, there are several laws in place that can appear to be conflict with the 2nd amendment.

This one regarding a mental screening test violates the 2nd amendment - but at the same time, creates a safer society. It discriminartes mentally ill people from normal people. Funny how I don't see a complete uproar in the US about it.

Another one, the United States vs. Miller case, is another example of the 2nd amendment being undermined. The supreme court overruled and reversed a decision a more local court made about a law violating the second amendment, and actually said that a shotgun like that wasn't protected by the 2nd amendment, as it wasn't 'military'. Obviously, the 2nd amendment is not a solid, right protecting law, it uses highly flexible, context sensitive terminology, and if it is attacked directly, can crumble under the old and irrelevant circumstances that it was conceived under.