I don’t understand why he says using the 2A is not a legitimate way to justify our right to own “high capacity magazines”. If the goal is to persuade people who are on the fence about gun rights, you have to go into the debate with the assumption the other person is not a hardcore leftist gun grabber. Let us assume that no matter how well you lay out your argument, you are not going to change Senator Feinstien’s mind (or anybody on the far left).
Once you take out the hard left population, you have the center population to work with. There is going to be a large percentage of this group that really has not given the Constitution any thought for many years. They read it in school, and did not give it any more in depth thought than what it took to pass a test. They have forgotten almost all of it except for maybe bits of the preamble.
These people could possibly be educated in what the 2A says, and why the framers put it in there.
Once you take out the hard left population, you have the center population to work with. There is going to be a large percentage of this group that really has not given the Constitution any thought for many years. They read it in school, and did not give it any more in depth thought than what it took to pass a test. They have forgotten almost all of it except for maybe bits of the preamble.
These people could possibly be educated in what the 2A says, and why the framers put it in there.