Where do you come down on whether the Constitution should be interpreted or taken as written?

Question

The reading, “Divisive Discourse…” gives excellent examples of the tactics and arguments on both sides of the issue of gun control, but in the end the debate boils down to differing interpretations of the second amendment. Many have argued that the element of “interpretability” is the strength of our Constitution. After having read about the bitterness and acrimony inherent in the guns debate, where do you come down on whether the Constitution should be interpreted or taken as written?

Answer 1

The Constitution was written over 200 years ago, however it's writing remains valid and still holds today. Moreover, for this document to remain valid it has to be accommodating throughout history. The second amendment was created to for Americans to protect themselves from the British, when muskets were the primary weapon around. Today we have much more advanced technology that the founders would have never dreamed of. Therefore, adapting the second amendment to modern technological advances is fitting. This concept is also very subjective and depends on whether you believe the founders meant exactly what they said or wrote the constitution so it could mean what it needed to mean.