4f68b3a2
XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.usa.constitution.gun-rights,
talk.politics.guns
From: wy_@myself.com
On 13 Apr, 17:05, RD Sandman
wrote:
>
> > In other words, you don't need a hi cap magazine for anything.
>
> So? What does need have to do with it? Do you need a V-8 or a V-6 in
> your car. Do you even need a 4?
When it comes to killing, need has everything to do with it? How many
times and how quickly do you *need* to kill?
>
> > Otherwise, you'd say what it would be for. What's the big secret in
> > not saying? Unless you have something to hide? Like a revolution in
> > the making or a mass killing in the planning?
> > Hmmm?
>
> YOu wish to discuss or just be a wiseass?
No one needs a hi cap weapon unless you plan to do some major
killing. Care to explain what else you might reasonably need one for?
>
> >> >> >> > What other rights are you talking about that the Constitution
> >> >> >> > gives?
>
> >> >> >> The Constitution does not grant or give rights. �It recogni
> > zes
> >> > �them.
>
> >> >> > Recognizing a right is worth about as much as your spit in a
> >> >> > bucket - nothing.
>
> >> >> If your government doesn't recognize your rights, you ignorant
> >> >> swine, you essentially don't have them. �Ask the women in
> >> >> Somalia or
> > Mali
> >> >> about genital mutilation.
>
> >> > The US government didn't recognize the rights of blacks till after
> >> > the Civil War, and even then it took another 100 years to recognize
> >> > their rights again. �They've had those rights all along in the
> >> > Constitution.
>
> >> Actually, they didn't. �Persons in the Constitution were assumed at
> >> the time to be landed gentry. �That is why it took three amendments
> >> after t
> > he
> >> Civil War to do something about it. �It even took an amendment after
> >> suffrage to get the vote for women.
>
> > You mean "We the People" only referred to landed gentry? Really?
> > Seriously? Says who?
>
> They were the ones who could vote.
So by that definition, they were the only ones the Constitution
applied to? Hey, you said it: "Persons in the Constitution were
assumed at the time to be landed gentry".
>
> Then in that case, everything in the
>
> > Constitution could've only been applied to landed gentry, including
> > the right to bear arms.
>
> The right to keep and bear arms was an existing right (from English law)
> and was protected so that the states could still have a resource to draw
> from to protect their sovereignty from an overreaching central
> government. Something the anti federalist were fearful of. The Second
> Amendment does that.
It only applied to the militia. But then, the militia wasn't made up
entirely of landed gentry. However, the Constitution only applied to
landed gentry, so it is "assumed". This is getting awfully confusing,
don't you think?
>
> Only they could bear arms because the
>
> > Constitution only applied to them - according to you.
>
> I am talking about who could vote in general. You could, of course, go
> read some history. I am not going to teach it to you.
Well, I'm certainly not learning anything useful from you since you
don't seem to be very clear or specific on things. "Assumed". The
Constitution is an "assumption".
>
> --
>
> Democracy means that anyone can grow up to be President,
>
> And anyone who doesn't grow up can be Vice President.
>
> Sleep well, tonight.....
>
> RD (The Sandman)
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
