It appears obvious that the world is a different place now then it was in the 18th century, when the Second Amendment, allowing the right to bear arms, was introduced.

The phrase, "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" seems to be the most misunderstood and misinterpreted phrase of modern times.

Personally, I believe that currently, a well regulated militia is not necessary, which invalidates the content of the amendment. The need to have a firearm in modern day times seems ridiculous to me.

I see the point in having a firearm. Hunting, sport shooting, self-defence, collecting.

I doubt there are many people who own guns for the reason of defending their country against a tyranny. Even in the late 1700s, when the British were overthrown, the main reason for owning guns was hunting and defence, not for militia activities.

__________________
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." — John Stuart Mill

Not one of the first ten Amendments are or ever will be outdated. Firearms ownership is, in the century of Authoritarianism on a scale that would make George III blush, more necessary than ever, for self-defence against criminals or the government. Power grows out of the barrel of a gun - and I believe in giving the power to the people.

__________________
"Those who turn swords into plowshares will do the plowing for those who do not" - Anon

"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded emotional and mental development" - Sigmund Freud

Are you implying that America is the same as it was in the eighteenth century and will remain the same forever....?

Look people the founding fathers realized that the consitution could require updating. They even made a method for it.

Meaning if part of it is outdated

YOU MAKE A FREAKING AMENDMENT!

It doesn't matter if they said that we get to have arms in order to make swiss cheese. You can't just toss out "the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed" until you pass an Amendment.

You don't just try and weasel around it or get someone to legislate from the bench for you.

EDIT: If you're saying we should make a new amendment see the many many other threads here that adress your topic.

No, it's gotten much worse than it was then in every way, and it has gotten worse because we haven't stuck to the values of those amendments as strictly as we should have.

__________________
"Those who turn swords into plowshares will do the plowing for those who do not" - Anon

"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded emotional and mental development" - Sigmund Freud

People are the same now as then and are entitled to the rights guaranteed by our Constitution.

__________________
“Race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now.” --Barack Obama

The Bill of Rights was meant to not be tampered with in any way. The bill of rights were meant to prevent tyranny and ensure the freedom of the people.

So SPECIFICALLY, how has the principle on which the 2nd Amendment rests, changed?

Now if you need to look up "specific" before you answer, please do. Don't waste this forums time with your feelings, I want to know the SPECIFIC changes that have invalidated the principles which provided protections on the means of government power to disarm the citizenry.

Your failure to provide such specifics will be your default concession...

__________________
Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so. Ronald Reagan
-
Representing the whole of Left-think, we find Java Black demonstrating why Leftism and the Leftists within it are so dangerous; why every culture wherein Leftists are found will crumble soon after they're found there... Enjoy:

-
Not responding to a discussion of technical diagrams...

Militia: An army composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers.

Hmmm, well recently there haven't been many rebellions that are being put down or a revolutionary war taking place on our soil. I see no need for an army composed of ordinary citizens, for there is no army or opposing force that a militia would fight. An army is not necessary. I truly hope that with that I didn't waste your time or anybody else on this forum's time . The "right to bear arms" is being taken out of context, as there are not many "well regulated militias" but there are active firearm users who abuse this amendment.