johnwilliamson062
Moderator
This conversation is entirely theoretical. Anyone posting it is impossible to distinguish between a pistol possessed for protection against a tyrannical government from one to protect from criminals is off topic.
From the text of the second amendment and my readings of our founding fathers I limit my interpretation of the second amendment to ownership and possession of firearms necessary to protect against tyrannical government. In my mind this does not relate to Hunting, or even home defense. It only pertains to homeland defense. I am not saying that those are not rights, just that they fall under the 9a not 2a. These other rights also seem to fall under common sense to me, but that doesn't seem to count for much in Washington.
Not what you wish it was meant for, what you actually think was the intent of the amendment
From the text of the second amendment and my readings of our founding fathers I limit my interpretation of the second amendment to ownership and possession of firearms necessary to protect against tyrannical government. In my mind this does not relate to Hunting, or even home defense. It only pertains to homeland defense. I am not saying that those are not rights, just that they fall under the 9a not 2a. These other rights also seem to fall under common sense to me, but that doesn't seem to count for much in Washington.
Not what you wish it was meant for, what you actually think was the intent of the amendment