The American relatioship with firearms is interesting in that one exists at all.

The public discussion about gun control and its merits has reentered the national discourse after a series of shocking and tragic shootings, ranging from Aurora, Colorado, to the Empire State Building, struck at the core of America’s spirit. Many have asked if these horrific acts of violence could have been prevented with the implementation of gun restrictions.

Much of the Western world has started to crack down on the spread of firearms. The European Union adopted a new, tighter gun control protocol in 2007. Australia adopted similarly restrictive laws in 1996.

However, when talk of gun control reaches the U.S., many people don’t look at the potential reform as meaning to promote safety—instead, these people see it as government infringing on a fundamental right of the people.

Yes, the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the constitution, does include the right to bear arms, along with the rights to freedom of speech, religion, and a fair and speedy trial. Therefore, to some people, the government infringing on our right to bear arms is as immoral as the government legislating our religious choices.

At the time of the writing of the Bill of Rights, including the right to bear arms in the Second Amendment made logical sense. In the late eighteenth century, guns were needed for protection in the Appalachian frontier and for arming local militias in villages which dotted the countryside.

Those were very good reasons in that age of America. But how do they apply to America today?

The British aren’t coming any time soon to reclaim land they feel is theirs. Nobody should be so concerned with potential government conspiracies that they need to stockpile weapons. The same point stands for potential zombie apocalypse scenarios.

Even in the case of needing a gun for protection against robbery or violent crime, a small handgun should do—accumulating an arsenal of assault weapons, on the other hand, is overkill.

The reality is that a large part of America sees the Constitution as it was written in the eighteenth century and assumes it perfectly applies to the entirely different world of the twenty-first century. Assuming that the Founding Fathers would have supported the methods in which guns are used today is a flawed generalization.

Looking back, the Founding Fathers, if nothing else, were reasonable men. On the other hand, strict adherence to the Second Amendment is not.