If the television, telephone, radio and Internet did not exist when the Constitution was written, should we extend the freedom of the First Amendment to those media types?
If so, how can you, with intellectual integrity, assume the Second Amendment was meant to be limited to flintlocks and muskets and other archaic black powder weapons?
If you believe the Second Amendment only protects muskets and other primitive firearms, shouldn't we also outlaw freedom of speech on any media that didn't exist at the time of the Constitution?
I can understand if you don't like guns or gun rights. But the simple fact is no constitutional basis exists that can be used to argue gun control is legal. Since we live in a constitutional republic, even if 99 percent of the people don't like it, that remaining 1 percent still have the right to bear arms without infringement.
ROB ARRIGO
Saratoga Springs
