While I understand why some would think that recent shootings could make the Second Amendment outdated, we should think about this for a second. After doing some research on the topic, I noticed that there is a pattern regarding the people who commit the shootings. From my research I found they all have severe mental and emotional disorders. This also includes the Virginia Tech shooter back in 2007.
Here is why the Second Amendment is not outdated:
First, the second amendment has been interpreted recently with the Supreme Court case, District of Columbia v. Heller. The final decision was that the Second Amendment protects an individual is right to use a gun for lawful purposes. This includes self-defense regarding home intrusion and federal enclaves and hunting. Two years later, McDonald v. Chicago not only backed this decision; it secured states rights to bear arms, not just federal.
Second, we do not ignore the “well regulated militia” part of the second amendment, which is described as a police force. This means that the interpretation is not the actual meaning of the Second Amendment. Basically, the Second Amendment is saying that, even though a police force needs to use guns to create a security of the country, people have the right to, if necessary, protect themselves. That is why if someone shoots a murderer and is acting in self-defense, all that person has to do is to tell them what happened. If the forensics backs their claims up, they would not be charged with any sort of crime.
So why bring up the NRA? Some would say that the world would be a safer place without guns, but that is also not true. Some would say to ignore that there are other crimes that do not require guns. The most common is rape, which can be considered to be the worst form of crime. This is because it can psychologically break a person’s mind down. You do not need guns for that, however, you can use a gun to prevent that from occurring.
Now I want to keep in mind the psychological aspects of the people who are committing these shootings. If you take the first three words of the Constitution (“We the People”), you will notice that they only mean white men over 18. This is taking into consideration the 13th, 15th and the 19th Amendments that expanded that phrase to race and gender. It still does not mean that children, the mentally insane and violent felons have those same rights, just to name a few. How they got their hands on a gun is from easy access from parents or friends.
This can be solved by an addition to state constitutions, which is what many states are trying to do. These states are requiring that you need to have a special license to own a gun. Many of these laws require a psychiatric exam to make sure that the individual is psychologically stable to own one.
Many people on the left side believe that it is the gun’s fault, but how can it be? Even if you completely outlaw guns, there are still ways to kill people. The real person to blame is the individual who held the gun.
If it is irrational to listen to words said 200 years ago then why should we not just get rid of freedom of the press right now? If that happened then journalists would be censored beyond repair or wouldn’t even be allowed to write anything that is necessary for informing the public. Even though we may have some disagreements, you cannot say that words from 200 years ago are irrelevant, because freedom of speech, right to privacy and even a trial by jury were said in that time period and they are among the reasons why this country is better than many countries that are struggling with these same rights.