XPost: alt.politics.congress, alt.politics.corruption, alt.politics.economics   
   XPost: alt.politics.election, alt.politics.misc, alt.politics.obama   
   XPost: alt.politics.scorched-earth, alt.politics.socialism.mao,    
   lt.politics.trump   
   XPost: alt.global-warming, alt.conspiracy, alt.apocolypse   
   XPost: alt.politics.usa, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.infowars   
   XPost: alt.beam-me-up.scotty.there-is-no.intelligent-life.down-here,   
   alt.politics.guns, alt.atheism   
   XPost: talk.politics.guns   
   From: NOT-SURE@idiocracy.gov   
      
   On 11/28/22 9:44 PM, OrigInfoJunkie wrote:   
   > On 7/6/2022 12:12 PM, Scout wrote:   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>  wrote in message   
   >> news:89jbch56kc8fbt16415ia3d7tkspqioner@4ax.com...   
   >>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 07:25:05 -0400, "Scout" wrote:   
   >>>> "Somebody too"  wrote   
   >>>>> I am allowed to have an AR-15   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Nothing allowed about it.... you have a right to have an AR-15   
   >>>   
   >>> Don't have a right to an M 16 or a cruise missile though.   
   >>>   
   >>> "Keep and bear *arms*"   
   >>   
   >> And which of those aren't arms?   
   >   
   > I see scooter is in need of a refresher on Heller.   
   >   
   >        There seems to us no doubt, on the basis of both text and   
   >        history, that the Second Amendment conferred an individual right   
   >        to keep and bear arms. Of course the right was *not unlimited*,   
   >        just as the First Amendment ’s right of free speech was not,   
   see,   
   >        e.g., United States v. Williams, 553 U. S. ___ (2008). Thus, we   
   >        do not read the Second Amendment to protect the right of citizens   
   >        to carry arms for any sort of confrontation, just as we do not   
   >        read the First Amendment to protect the right of citizens to   
   >        speak for any purpose.   
   >        [...]   
      
      
   Yet FREE SPEECH IS NOT LIMITED and ARMS are NOT that which is on LIST of   
     Government accepted weapons...   
      
   Arms are what the Government issues to it's "people" for self defense   
   (past and Present) as well as all the personal self defense that you   
   might take hunting or for other self defense situations.   
      
   The LIST of what "ARMS" are is fluid and can't be limited since new ARMS   
   can be developed by persons with that RIGHT every day for their own   
   personal use. And then you have the ones the government attempted to ban   
   that they called arms...  they are also all legal be they banned by law   
   or NOT if they are "arms" the only way to prove they can be banned would   
   be to prove they aren't what the people and the Government call "arms"   
     as in what a soldier or civilian police or spies or other government   
   entities have ever issued to their people as personal defense or   
   security for a politicians personal defense and carried by their   
   security teams.   
      
   Because calling them arms or using them as arms and issuing them as arms   
   is the Government admitting that it's the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP   
   AND BEAR THEM AS ARMS.  You see the PERJURY TRAP that the Government is   
   in, they can't redefine all they did and make it disappear. They have   
   already laid the precedence for the word "ARMS" by their own fear of   
   being killed and how they protect themselves from it. The Government has   
   armed it's people and those "they use" as protection are also arms   
   guaranteed to us for protection as our RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS...   
   the same arms that the government uses as arms.   
      
   And it's even more obvious today since Democrats have chosen to NOT   
   protect WE THE PEOPLE, and now we see the dire need to be armed as well   
   as the police and the THUGS the Government hires to for their mandates   
   on us.   
      
      
      
      
   >        Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is   
   >        *not unlimited*.   
      
   Of course it is, as far as arms are concerned... the number and type and   
   the bullets it can carry and the rest as long as the Government used it   
   and issued it we know it's safe enough and equal enough to be the same   
   arms that we have a Constitutional access to keep and bear.   
      
   >        From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases,   
   >        commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was   
   >        not a right to keep and carry *any weapon whatsoever* in any   
   >        manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.   
      
   Purpose is limited by the RIGHT of others that you may NOT violate...   
   any manner of carrying is a question of safety and threat or where the   
   line for assault or taking someone hostage when you use the gun or your   
   size or a hammer as the threat.   
      
   >        [emphasis added]   
   >   
   >   
   > You may think the right *ought* to be unlimited, scooter, but as a   
   > matter of text, history and interpretation, it is not.   
      
   That's False, the RIGHT is to keep and bear "ARMS" and it is unlimited   
   although it is limited to the keeping and Bearing of "ARMS" as the   
   unlimited RIGHT.  It's NOT unlimited to things like hammers and Weapons   
   of MASS DESTRUCTION which aren't or should I say weren't issued to   
   Government workers and soldiers and police for personal protection.   
      
   We don't carry those for hunting, or sport or to secure our homes or   
   kill intruders intent on killing us... although we did see the Native   
   Americans attacked with virus' and the Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh Cult used   
   salmonella and (E. coli) but neither were for personal protection from   
   violence it was more of a general use for illegal acts.   
      
   > That is simply a   
   > fact, and you crazed far-right-wingnut gun crackpots are going to have   
   > to accommodate themselves to that fact.   
   >   
      
   The FACT is that it's "THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS"   
      
   and that fact means that any guns knives or sticks or bullet proof vests   
   that the Government issues as personal protection is also legal as per   
   the U.S. Constitution and without infringement... for WE THE PEOPLE,   
   because they are are all "ARMS" and the ONLY LIMITATION on the RIGHT to   
   KEEP and BEAR is that it be "ARMS" and everything that the Government   
   has is or will be issuing those people as personal protection for people   
   working in Government or as contractors for Government or Military or   
   security for politicians...  or protecting the heads of GIAN ASS   
   CORPORATIONS is also ARMS that WE THE PEOPLE CAN KEEP AND BEAR.   
      
      
      
   > You do not have a right to just whatever arms you may wish to have,   
      
   Actually I do, read the U.S. Constitution where it openly says I do...   
      
   *Amendment II*   
   A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free   
   State, *the right of the people to keep and bear Arms* , *shall not be*   
   *infringed* .   
      
   > scooter. And your thoughts on just what arms *are* included with the   
   > limits of the right is worthless and ignored, scooter.  Your   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)