It would depend on which gun laws. At the federal level, they'd be horrified of any gun laws other than in the context of international trade. At the state level, they would probably think they're foolish but accept states' right to restrict guns.
They'd probably view them the way they viewed people (including children) who did messed up things back in their day. Evil isn't new, and I don't think modern mass shooters would shock the founding fathers. Mass murderers existed in the US in the 18th and early 19th centuries. They existed in Great Britain. They knew of horrific things done to slaves and both to and by Native Americans. They had fought in the Revolutionary War, and before that fought in numerous smaller wars between the colonial powers and against native tribes. These weren't ******* who would have sqealed at the sight of blood or seeing something horrible done.
I's highly unlikely that they'd favor disarming or restricting innocent people to try to stop a handful of bad guys, because they didn't do that in response to their own bad guys. From a public policy perspective, they'd focus on punishing the bad guys. From a cultural and community perspective, they'd probably wonder what went wrong in the killer's life so people can learn from it, though it's usually pretty obvious.
How should it be interpreted?
-
Agree x 2
Last edited: Jan 17, 2021