mickey疯了

If Americans were writing the Constitution over again in 2013, would it make sense to include the right to bear arms? Or has it become outdated?

Some argue that states should have the ability to decide the laws they want around guns, instead of having a national standard. And they point to the Second Amendment's language about the need for well-regulated militias as evidence of its anachronism.

Others counter that the right to bear arms has become fundamental to the notion of self-defense and safety today — that without guns, people would be unable to protect themselves from criminals. They say it's important for that right to continue to be enshrined in the Constitution so that it is ensured for all citizens, no matter which state they call home.

A group of scholars recently faced off on the motion "The Constitutional Right To Bear Arms Has Outlived Its Usefulness" in an Oxford-style debate for Intelligence Squared U.S.

Before the debate, the audience at New York City's Kaufman Music Center voted 64 percent in favor of the motion and 18 percent against, with 18 percent undecided. Afterward, 74 percent agreed with the motion, while 22 percent disagreed — meaning the side arguing that the right to bear arms has outlived its usefulness were the winners of the debate.