Originally Posted by wjh2657

Without meaning to you have have acceeded to my point. It was necessary to amend the Constitution to include those that the BOR forgot. The fundamental principal alluded to in the BOR did not recognize individuals of all callings and races. We later (not very much later though) amended the principals expressed to include everybody. My point was that the original 10 Amendments later had to be expressed in other terms to prove effective. We to many times give our forefathers Saintly status. The truth is (with some notable exceptions) they were for the most part landed aristocracy and gentry who did not even think about the rights of all. The BOR is a magnificent work, but it wasn't originally supported by the majority of the signers of the Constitution. Only a vigorous fight by a small minority of people (Jefferson, Franklin and Washington were leaders) got it accepted as part of the constitution and then it had to be separate amendments. To project that the founders intended the second amendment to mean all of us should be armed is to disregard history. I believe the right to defend ones self is a GOD-given right, one of the inalienable rights set forth in the Declaration of Independence. I am not fixated on the legal arguments of the 2dA because it is so limited in its scope. I sincerely feel that it is my right as a free man, period. Luckily, for me, my state, Tennessee, agrees to that principle at least to the extent that I can carry a weapon to defend myself. If you live in a state that does not allow you to carry a weapon for self-defense, there is a controlling "aristocracy" keeping you disarmed and in my opinion you are not a free man.

Originally Posted by BAC

The US Constitution doesn't apply principles to anyone, anywhere. It's a binding legal document outlining the limitations of government(s).