XPost: can.talk.guns, alt.guns, alt.rec.guns   
   XPost: talk.politics.guns   
   From: me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net   
      
   "Leif"  wrote in message   
   news:1189707451.827623.145790@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...   
   > On Sep 13, 4:52 am, "Topp@Work"  wrote:   
   >> "Spaz"  wrote in message   
   >>   
   >> news:9LCdnZ1NOcJU5HXbnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@comcast.com...   
   >>   
   >> > "RSweeney"  wrote in message   
   >> >news:tq2dnRvRTuoP9nXbnZ2dnUVZ_sqinZ2d@comcast.com...   
   >>   
   >> > > its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be   
   >> > > infringed; but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it   
   >> > > shall   
   >> > > not be infringed by Congress.   
   >>   
   >> > That's true.  So there's no reason the local government of San   
   >> > Francisco   
   >> > can't implement their own gun ban.   
   >>   
   >> Except it violates State law.....   
   >> And cities can not violate state law   
   >   
   > Leif speaking: The SECOND AMENDMENT provides no reason why the local   
   > government of San Francisco can't implement their own gun ban.   
      
   See 14th Amendment.   
      
   Oh, I can hear you now claiming that the 2nd hasn't been incorporated.   
      
   If that is your response, then kindly show me where the 14th allows for   
   incorporation.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)