An observation on the 2nd Amendment and gun ownership

There has been quite a lot of debate surrounding the notion of gun control, particularly as we move into an age of 3D printed guns. Some find the notion of strong gun control unruly, while others believe it is critical. The debate is engaging, with both sides presenting coercive arguments. Yet, I have to wonder if the issue is more seminal than that.

The sorts of weapons available at the time of the 2nd Amendment’s adaptation (1791) were modest in their capabilities. Like a pirate’s cannon, the 18th century handgun required the owner to push a bullet down a barrel before each shot was fired — even then it was rarely fatal, if it even hit it’s intended target at all. The first successful semiautomatic pistols didn’t exist until over one hundred years after the 2nd Amendment was instated.

Whereas nowadays, weapons are so incomprehensibly powerful that we don’t grasp the damage they’re causing. 60 rounds, 2 magazines, less than 30 seconds, and this guy doesn’t seem to be in a rush.

SCUD missiles were never A Right, they were obviously too destructive for civilians to use. Perhaps the same should be applicable to modern guns? Could it be that the Bill of Rights is wrong and that we’ve never questioned it’s dogma? I’m not sure what the answer is, but I feel there needs to be a high level of discussion happening that has nothing to do with guns, but rather the fundamentals upon which society operates.