Letter: Focus on the ammo
The Second Amendment states “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
Right-wingnuts are notoriously strict constructionists – interpreting the Constitution to mean what it meant when drafted. However, this philosophy is conveniently ignored when it comes to the Second Amendment. Ignored is the caveat “a well-regulated militia. . . .” Moreover, using strict construction, the Second Amendment provides only a right to keep and bear muskets and flintlocks. Can any reasonable person think the framers imagined a weapon that could fire multiple rounds per second?
Even if the Second Amendment is interpreted in a manner that ignores the first clause and includes a right to possess modern “arms,” said “arms” are firearms, which is the physical weapon. There is no mention of ammunition in the Second Amendment and thus no constitutional right to manufacture, sell, own or possess ammunition, or unlimited quantities thereof.
If those who wish to enact sensible gun laws would focus on ammunition and not the guns, the only danger a firearm would present is if it is thrown at someone. More important, it would “dis-arm” much of the rhetoric heard from the gun nuts.