Many anti-gun fanatics have made the wild claims that the militia only referred to the military, but at the time of the writing of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, the militia was the people. Besides, if this is true, then why are most military personnel forbidden to carry firearms here in the states?
Since that argument has been pretty much debunked, others are trying to make the case that the authors of the Constitution and Bill of Rights were only referring to the guns of their day, which were all muzzle loaders and not to today’s modern guns.
Is this a valid argument? Were our Framers that naïve as to be blind to the idea of any advancement in technology? It’s doubtful.
(HaroldNet) – A frequently expressed opinion by those wanting more gun control and/or restrictions is that the Second Amendment was meant to include only firearms that used the technology common to that period. That position totally ignores the fact that the Founding Fathers were very intelligent and forward-thinking people well versed in the rapid rate of technological advancement taking place, not just in America, but especially in Europe, where firearms technology was spurred by the ongoing conflicts between nations, kingdoms and empires.
Firearms were a very important world export product for several European countries. Men like Jefferson and Franklin were certainly attuned to these developments, and both were credited with inventions that spawned products widely used today. It was the American firearms industry that developed the basis for most modern manufacturing methods such as interchangeable parts and mass production using powered machinery. This in turn, stimulated the growth of the industries supplying materials and equipment to the gun makers…
Even in the time of the Framers there were technological advancements being made in many areas including printing presses, metallurgy, farming, shipbuilding and more. Those men were the leaders of their day for a reason, because they were smart and open to change, especially necessary change, so it is almost certain that they would have considered advances for firearms as well.