Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    alt.conspiracy.america-at-war    |    Debating how war is good for business    |    4,706 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 3,848 of 4,706    |
|    oldpink to Leif    |
|    Re: Handgun ban in U.S. capital could re    |
|    16 Sep 07 02:10:09    |
      XPost: can.talk.guns, alt.guns, alt.rec.guns       XPost: talk.politics.guns       From: oldpink@nltc.net              Leif wrote:       [...]       >>However, failing to do so doesn't prove your point since guns are still       >>effects and thus protected.- Hide quoted text -       >>       >>- Show quoted text -       >       >       > Leif speaking: If personal guns are protected as "effects" under the       > 4th Amendment, then there is really no need to give them protection       > again under the 2nd Amendment -- and of course the the Framers       > didn't. The 2nd Amendment protects the people as a well regulated       > militia.              Bzzt!       The Founders explicitly mentioned arms in the SA because of their       previous bad experience with the British attempting to disarm them.       Since there were so many colonists in the New World who were so       proficient with small arms, they were able to defeat the largest and       most powerful standing army in the world at that time.       Recognizing that the ability to defend oneself against tyrannical       invaders, common felons, and other hostiles is part and parcel of true       freedom, they made the right to keep and bear arms explicit in the SA.       Further, to claim that the milita is the National Guard, and that ONLY       Guardsmen while on duty can carry arms is pure obfuscation.       There WAS no NG at that point in time.       The militia at that time was drawn from all able bodied men, using their       own weapons when mustered to do battle against the British regulars.       The militiamen were not a part of a formal army at all.       They came completely voluntarily, under no obligation save their own       promises, and they used their OWN arms, stored in their OWN homes, period.       Yes, the Founders at that point in time were primarily concerned with       being able to repel a foreign invader, but they also well knew the more       common everyday threats faced by colonists, particularly those in       isolated locations, with no assistance from either neighbors or a police       force.       To claim otherwise is either naivete or outright dishonesty.       --       And what exactly is a joke?              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca